Skip to main content
. 2019 Dec 12;2019(12):CD011927. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011927.pub2

Comparison 1. TENS versus sham TENS.

Outcome or subgroup title No. of studies No. of participants Statistical method Effect size
1 Pain (VAS) (at short term) 1   Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI) Totals not selected
1.1 Conventional TENS 1   Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI) 0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
1.2 Burst TENS 1   Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI) 0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
1.3 Acupuncture‐like TENS 1   Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI) 0.0 [0.0, 0.0]
2 Pain (percentage of participants presenting improvement of pain) (short term) 1   Risk Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI) Totals not selected
3 Pain assessed by myometer score (short term) 1   Mean Difference (IV, Random, 95% CI) Subtotals only