@article{ART001792280},
author={최효정 and Kim Sung-Soo},
title={Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes},
journal={Journal of Korean Medicine Rehabilitation},
issn={1229-1854},
year={2013},
volume={23},
number={3},
pages={107-116}
TY - JOUR
AU - 최효정
AU - Kim Sung-Soo
TI - Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes
JO - Journal of Korean Medicine Rehabilitation
PY - 2013
VL - 23
IS - 3
PB - The Korean Academy Of Oriental Rehabilitation Medicine
SP - 107
EP - 116
SN - 1229-1854
AB - Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate the most effective stimulatingelectrode in Microcurrent electrical neuromuscular stimulation (MENS) for pain relief, andto apply to the treatment of Delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS).
Methods We included 45 participants who met the inclusion criteria. DOMS of bothTriceps Surae Muscles were experimentally induced through eccentric contractions.
24-hours after induction of DOMS, who scored more than 40 mm in visual analogue scale(VAS) were randomly assigned into three groups (n=44). In 15 of them, needle electrodeswere inserted into BL57, BL56. In 15 of them, surface electrodes were applied on thesame points and the others were treated with manual acupuncture. The effects of pain reliefwere assessed by visual analogue scale (VAS), mechanical pain threshold (MPT), surfaceelectromyography (SEMG).
Results In VAS, group comparison had no significant difference after all treatments haddone. The difference in VAS between the time before the treatment was started (Day 2)and after all treatments were completed was greater in Acupuncture group than that ofneedle-electrode group. In MPT, there was no significant difference among groups.
Electrical contraction decreased significantly at 2nd before-after treatment comparison inneedle-electrode MENS group. But fatigue scores were not significantly different betweengroups.
Conclusions The results suggest that the types of electrodes has no significant effecton microcurrent therapy in DOMS.
KW - Delayed onset muscle soreness;MENS;Needle electrode;Surface electrode;Acupuncture
DO -
UR -
ER -
최효정 and Kim Sung-Soo. (2013). Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes. Journal of Korean Medicine Rehabilitation, 23(3), 107-116.
최효정 and Kim Sung-Soo. 2013, "Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes", Journal of Korean Medicine Rehabilitation, vol.23, no.3 pp.107-116.
최효정, Kim Sung-Soo "Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes" Journal of Korean Medicine Rehabilitation 23.3 pp.107-116 (2013) : 107.
최효정, Kim Sung-Soo. Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes. 2013; 23(3), 107-116.
최효정 and Kim Sung-Soo. "Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes" Journal of Korean Medicine Rehabilitation 23, no.3 (2013) : 107-116.
최효정; Kim Sung-Soo. Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes. Journal of Korean Medicine Rehabilitation, 23(3), 107-116.
최효정; Kim Sung-Soo. Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes. Journal of Korean Medicine Rehabilitation. 2013; 23(3) 107-116.
최효정, Kim Sung-Soo. Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes. 2013; 23(3), 107-116.
최효정 and Kim Sung-Soo. "Efficacy of Microcurrent Electrical Neuromuscular Stimulation with Different Types of Stimulating Electrodes" Journal of Korean Medicine Rehabilitation 23, no.3 (2013) : 107-116.
