Table 5.
RCTs investigating the impact of electrical stimulation on chronic wound healing.
| Study Design |
Type of ES/Electrode Placement | Exposure Duration |
Type of Chronic Wound | No. of Participants | % Wound Area Reduction/% of Wounds Healed | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RCT | HVPC †/Treatment electrode placed over wound | 50 min/day, 5 days/week for 6 weeks | Pressure ulcers |
63 patients Cathodal (n = 23) Anodal-cathodal (n = 20) Sham treatment(n = 20) |
PAR 1 82.34% and 70.77% in ES group, respectively, 40.53% in control/Wound healing not specified |
[52] |
| RCT | HVPC/Treatment electrode placed over wound | 50 min/day, 5 days/week for 6 weeks | Pressure ulcers |
77 patients ES (n = 24) Sham (n = 28) US 1 (n = 25) |
PAR 76.19% in ES group 48.97% in control group/52% of ulcers healed in ES group, 23% healed in control | [53] |
| RCT | HVPC/Treatment electrode placed over wound | 60 min/day for 20 days | Pressure ulcers |
17 patients ES (n = 8) Sham (n = 9) |
Wound PAR not specified, higher in ES than control group/38% of ES wound healed vs. 22% in sham group (p > 0.05) | [54] |
| RCT | HVPC/Treatment electrode placed over wound | 45–120 min daily for 5 weeks (45 min for sham treatment) | Pressure ulcers |
60 patients ES (n = 45) Sham (n = 15) |
After 60 and 120 min exposure PAR 91% in ES group vs. 25% in sham group/Wound healing not recorded | [55] |
| RCT | HVPC/Treatment electrode placed over wound | 45 min/day, five days/week for average 7.4 weeks |
Pressure ulcers |
16 patients ES (n = 9) Sham (n = 7) |
100% wound area reduction in treatment group, 28.9% increase in wound area in control group/Complete healing in ES group | [56] |
| RCT | Biphasic current/Treatment electrode places across wound on intact skin | 30 min/day, 3 days/week, for 4 weeks |
Mixed ulcers (diabetic and vascular) |
17 patients Diabetic (n = 8) Non-diabetic (n = 9) |
PAR 70% in diabetic group, 38.4% in non- diabetic group/Wound healing not specified |
[57] |
| RCT | HVPC/Treatment electrode placed over wound | 45 min/day, 3 days/week for 4 weeks |
Mixed ulcers (diabetic and venous) |
27 patients ES (n = 14) Sham (n = 13) |
Wound PAR 44.3% in ES group and 16.6% in control group/Wound healing not specified | [58] |
| RCT | PC (using bodyflow device)/Treatment electrodes placed above and below the wound site | 20 min/day, 4 days/week for 8 weeks | Venous ulcers | 23 patients ES (n = 14) Sham (n = 9) |
PAR 32.67% in ES, Sham ES 23.15%/Wound healing not recorded |
[59] |
| RCT | Biphasic PC/Treatment electrodes placed over intact skin proximal to the wound site | 30 min of exposure | Diabetic footulcers | 80 patients Asymmetrical PC (n = 21), Symmetrical PC (n = 20), Low stimulation current (n = 19) Sham (n = 20) |
Healing rate per week: 27% in asymmetrical PC, 16% in symmetrical PC, ~9.7% in control group/Wound healing not recorded |
[60] |
| RCT | AC ‡/Not specified | 20 min twice daily for 12 weeks | Diabetic footulcers | 51 patients ES (n = 24) Placebo (n = 27) |
PAR 61% in ES group, 41% in placebo group/42% of ES exposed ulcers healed vs. 15% in placebo group | [61] |
| RCT | HVPC/Treatment electrodes embedded in stockings placed around the wound | 8 h nightly for 12 weeks | Diabetic footulcers | 40 patients ES (n = 20) Sham (n = 20) |
PAR 86% in ES group, 71% in sham group/65% of ES wounds healed vs. 35% of wounds in sham group | [62] |
| RCT | HVPC/Treatment electrodes placed on opposite edges of the wound site | 50 min/day, 5 day/week for 8 weeks |
Pressure ulcers |
61 patients Anodal HVPC (n = 20) Cathodal HVPC (n = 21) Sham (n = 20) |
PAR 64.1% in anodal HVPC group, 74.06% in cathodal HVPC group, 41.42% in sham group/Complete wound healed not recorded | [63] |
† HVPC: High voltage pulsed current; ‡ AC: Alternating current; 1 PAR: Percentage area reduction; US: Ultrasound.