Abstract
Electrotherapy is commonly used for myalgia alleviation. Low-frequency stimulation (LFS) is primarily used for controlling acute and chronic pain and is a non-invasive therapy that can be easily performed with electric stimulation applied on the skin. However, little evidence exists regarding the pain alleviation effects of personal low-frequency stimulation device for home use. Moreover, no studies have compared myalgia alleviation effects between personal low-frequency stimulation (PLS) and physical therapy (PT), which are most commonly used for patients with myalgia in hospitals and clinics. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the pain alleviation effects of PLS in patients with myalgia and compare these effects with those of conventional PT (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation + ultrasound). In total, 39 patients with myalgia in the neck, shoulder, back, and waist areas were randomly assigned to the personal low-frequency stimulation group (PLSG: n = 20) and physical therapy group (PTG: n = 19). Both groups were treated for 3 weeks (20 min per session and 5 sessions per week). Patients were assessed for pain intensity by surface electromyography (sEMG), visual analogue scale (VAS) and a short-form McGill pain questionnaire (SF-MPQ) before and after the intervention period. Our results showed that PLSG showed a tendency of muscle relaxation with a significant decrease in sEMG in the neck (p = 0.0425), shoulder (p = 0.0425), and back (p = 0.0046) areas compared to the control group. However, there was no significant difference in waist area. Additionally, VAS scores significantly decreased between pre- and post-treatment in both PTG (p = 0.0098), and PLSG (p = 0.0304) groups, but there was no significance difference between the groups. With respect to SF-MPQ, the PLSG showed greater pain alleviation (5.23 ± 0.25) effects than the PTG (6.23 ± 0.25). Accordingly, our results suggest that PLS treatment using a home device might offer positive assistance in pain alleviation for patients with myalgia that is as equally effective as conventional PT treatment. However, further detailed studies are required considering larger samples to fully claim the effectiveness of this device.