To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Pain and function unaffected by IFC versus sham in postoperative rehabilitation after TKA

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
July 2019

Pain and function unaffected by IFC versus sham in postoperative rehabilitation after TKA

Vol: 8| Issue: 7| Number:28| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Is interferential current effective in the management of pain, range of motion, and edema following total knee arthroplasty surgery? A randomized double-blind controlled trial

Clin Rehabil. 2019 Jun;33(6):1027-1034. doi: 10.1177/0269215519829856

Contributing Authors:
N Ozkayin K Aktuglu S Hepguler C Ozturk FC Atamaz MR Kadi E Dede S Aydogdu

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

113 patients scheduled for total knee arthroplasty were randomized to postoperative management with either active or sham interferential current therapy. Patients were primarily assessed for outcome related to pain on a visual analog scale, with secondary outcomes of knee range of motion, knee circumference, and paracetamol consumption. Outcomes were assessed after 5 days and 1 month. Results for ...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue