Review of evidence for interferential therapy (IFT) protocols for pain management

Introduction:

Survey data of UK clinicians show no consensus regarding IFT protocols for the treatment of pain[1,2].

Aim:

To systematically review the literature and other resources accessible by UK clinicians in order to: identify IFT protocols proposed for pain relief and establish if an evidence base exists for these.

Methods:

A systematic search of 14 biomedical and life sciences databases, using key words and MeSH headings, was undertaken. Four other sources of potential evidence were also identified along with manufacturer operating manuals and relevant textbooks from publishers websites, online library catalogues of UK Universities offering undergraduate physiotherapy courses and through hand searching of reference lists. Relevant websites were searched for using key terms within internet search engines. Clinical guidelines were sought from professional bodies. The quality of published research was assessed via relevant validated assessment tools (i.e. Oxman, PEDro, CASP). The rigour of the IFT protocols identified from other sources was assessed by establishing the extent and quality of the underlying research provided to substantiate it.

Results:

6 systematic reviews, 8 narrative reviews, 18 clinical RCTs, 18 RCTs on healthy participants, 8 surveys, 8 editorials, 2 case studies, 1 animal study, 40 manuals, 25 textbooks, 5 websites and 1 set of guidelines were included.

Discussion:

Literature does not provide robust evidence or consensus on effective IFT parameters for pain relief. Protocols recommended by manufacturers and found in textbooks are not based on high-quality research findings. Further research is needed to establish whether IFT is an effective treatment for pain.