Efficacy of diadynamic currents versus transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation for transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation in subjects with overactive bladder syndrome: A double-blind randomized controlled trial.
Jaya Shanker Tedla, Sneha Latha Lalaji, Ajaya Kumar Midde et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This double-blind randomized controlled trial compared transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (TTNS) delivered with diadynamic currents (DDC) or transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in women aged 18–80 years with overactive bladder. Both groups received eight sessions over four weeks alongside conventional physical therapy, including Kegel and breathing exercises. Symptoms and quality of life improved significantly from before to after treatment in both groups. Between-group comparisons found no significant difference in improvement on the ICIQ-OAB and ICIQ-OAB QOL measures (p=0.87 and p=0.95, respectively).
Key findings
- ICIQ-OAB and ICIQ-OAB QOL scores improved significantly after treatment in both groups.
- Improvement did not differ significantly between DDC and TENS groups on ICIQ measures (p-values of 0.87 and 0.95).
- Correlations between patient-related characteristics and outcome improvements were not significant.
Why it matters
The findings suggest that DDC may be a feasible alternative current for TTNS, with outcomes similar to TENS in this trial. They also indicate that symptom and quality-of-life improvements occurred with a treatment package that included conventional physical therapy, so the results do not isolate the contribution of TTNS or either current.
What to keep in mind
The abstract does not report the sample size or numerical effect estimates. Because both groups also received conventional physical therapy, the independent effect of TTNS or the stimulation current cannot be determined.