Electro-Acupuncture Versus Low Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation in Chronic Non-Specific Neck Pain

Background: Chronic non-specific neck pain affects the lateral and dorsal aspects of the neck that might be associated with pain, impairment of functional level and active range of motion of the cervical spine, and cervical flexion rotation range of motion. Aim of Study: Was to compare the effect of electro-acu-puncture (EA) with low transcutaneous electrical nerve stimu-lation (TENS) on pain intensity level, function of the cervical region, cervicalactive range of motion (ROM), and cervical flexion rotation test (FRT) in patients with chronic non-specific neck pain. Patients and Methods: Sixty chronic non-specific neck pain patients from both genders were enrolled in the study. Their ages ranged from 18 to 35 years. Patients were randomly assigned into three equal groups; the Control Group received conventional physical therapy only. Experimental Group (A) received conventional physical therapy, in addition to EA. Ex-perimental Group (B) received conventional physical therapy and low TENS. Treatment sessions were conducted two times per week for a month. The duration of each session ranged from 45 to 60 minutes. Pre- and post-treatment measurements were conducted for pain intensity level, functional neck disability level, cervical active range of motion, and cervical flexion ro-tation using a visual analouge scale (VAS), Arabic neck disa-bility index (NDI), a mobile application inclinometer, and FRT respectively. Results: Each group showed a statistically significant de-crease in the VAS score, Arabic NDI score, cervical ROM, and FRT in each group post-treatment compared with pre-treat-ment. There was a significant decrease in the VAS score and Arabic NDI score of groups (A) and (B) compared with that of the control group (p<0.05). There was a significant increase in FRT and cervical ROM of groups (A) and (B) compared with the control group (p<0.05). There was no significant difference in VAS score, Arabic NDI score, cervical ROM, and cervical FRT between groups (A) and (B) (p>0.05). Conclusion: It could be concluded that either EA or TENS had a more beneficial effect on pain intensity levels, functional outcomes, cervical active ROM, and FRT when added to con-ventional physical therapy in patients with chronic non-specific neck pain when compared with conventional physical therapy alone. So, it is recommended to consider this modality in the physical therapy program of patients with chronic non-specific neck pain.