Efficacy of capacitive resistive monopolar radiofrequency in the physiotherapeutic treatment of chronic pelvic pain syndrome: a randomized controlled trial
Aim To evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant, capacitive resistive monopolar radiofrequency (CRMRF, INDIBA) treatment at 448 kHz together with physiotherapeutic techniques compared to a sham treatment with the same techniques, for pain reduction and quality of life (QoL) improvements in patients with ch...
| Autores: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2022 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universitat Ramon Llull (URL) |
| Repositorio: | DAU Arxiu Digital de la Universitat Ramon Llull |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:dau.url.edu:20.500.14342/3762 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14342/3762 https://doi.org/10.1002/nau.24903 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Bufeta -- Dolor Aparell genital -- Dolor Dolor pelvià Radiofreqüència INDIBA Fisioteràpia Qualitat de vida Assaigs clínics 615 616.7 |
| Sumario: | Aim To evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant, capacitive resistive monopolar radiofrequency (CRMRF, INDIBA) treatment at 448 kHz together with physiotherapeutic techniques compared to a sham treatment with the same techniques, for pain reduction and quality of life (QoL) improvements in patients with chronic pelvic pain syndrome (CPPS). Methods A triple-blind, randomized controlled trial (RCT) including patients with CPPS randomly allocated (1:1) to a CRMRF-activated group (intervention) or a CRMRF-deactivated one (control). Both groups received physiotherapeutic techniques and pain education weekly for 10 consecutive weeks. Data from a visual analogical scale and the SF-12 questionnaire were collected at trial commencement and repeated at the 5th and 10th sessions. Pain intensity was considered the main outcome. For the comparisons between variables, the χ2 and Student's t test were used. Superiority was analyzed by estimating the mean change (95% confidence interval). Analysis was performed for the per-protocol and the intention-to-treat populations. The statistical significance level was set at p < 0.05. Results Eighty-one patients were included (67.9% women) with a mean age of 43.6 years (SD 12.9). CRMRF lessened pain scores by more than 2 points and improved QoL by 5 points. There were no relevant side effects and overall adherence to the treatment was 86.4%. Conclusions This is the first RCT that evaluates the efficacy of CRMRF (INDIBA) compared to a sham treatment, and demonstrates its superiority in decreasing pain and improving QoL. Such results may lead to greater prescribing of CRMRF when treating CPPS patients. |
|---|