CClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT04243915PNMESlowbackUpdated May 15, 2023

Percutaneous Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain

An interventional study of Percutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation (PNMES) plus motor control exercise program and Sham PNMES (introducing the needle) plus motor control exercise program in Low Back Pain, sponsored by Universidad Rey Juan Carlos. Recruiting at 1 site in Spain. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 65 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2023-05-15.

Sponsored by Universidad Rey Juan Carlos · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Primary completion was expected by Jun 2024, 2 years 3 months ago, but the record still lists the study as recruiting.
  • Started Apr 2021; still recruiting 5 years 5 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
64
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 65 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Chronic low back pain is a common musculoskeletal condition affects the general population. Low back pain constitutes a major burden to health care system and society. Several authors have found that the deep abdominal muscles and multifidus are affected in low back pain. Dry needling has shown improve the cross-sectional area of the multifidus. Percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation has shown reduce pain in several conditions. There are not studies that had investigated the impact of percutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation (PNMES) in the deep muscles in patients with chronic low back pain.

Hypothesis: PNMES in the multifidus muscle plus motor control exercise program in patients with chronic low back pain is better than sham PNMES plus exercise and transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) plus exercise

Read the detailed description

Randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled clinical trial, using percutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation (PNMES). PNMES is technique to provide a transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation current throughout needling filaments place close to the nerve.

Study Aims:

Aim #1: The primary aim of the study is to compare the effect of the short, medium and long-term of PNMES on muscle activation (increased cross-sectional area in activation) and the function of multifidus and abdominal transverse muscle in patients with chronic low back pain with random assignment to four treatments: PENS plus motor control exercise program or Sham PNMES (introducing the needle) plus motor control exercise program or Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) plus motor control exercise program or Sham PNMES (without inserting the needle) plus motor control exercise program.

Aim #2: The secondary aim of the study is to compare the effect of the short, medium and long-term of PNMES on pain as measured by visual analogue scale (VAS), chronic Pain Grade Questionnaire, pressure pain threshold (PPT), area and distribution of pain, conditioned pain modulation and temporal summation in patients with chronic low back pain with random assignment to four treatments: PNMES plus motor control exercise program or Sham PNMES (introducing the needle) plus motor control exercise program or Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) plus motor control exercise program or Sham PNMES (without inserting the needle) plus motor control exercise program.

Aim #3: To compare the effect of the short, medium and long-term of PNMES on disability as measured by Oswestry Disability Index, strength and quality of life with random assignment to four treatments: PENS plus motor control exercise program or Sham PNMES (introducing the needle) plus motor control exercise program or Transcutaneous Electrical Nerve Stimulation (TENS) plus motor control exercise program or Sham PNMES (without inserting the needle) plus motor control exercise program.

Aim #4: To estimate the immediate effects of the PNMES technique after the first session.

Aim #5: To determine if psychological factors (anxiety, depression, kinesiophobia and catastrophism) change with any of the treatments and if is related with the primary and secondary outcomes.

Aim #6: To evaluate the change perceived by the patient measured with Global Rating of Change Scale (GROC).

Aim Aim #7: Validation of placebo groups by assessing patient blindness

02

Conditions studied

  • Low Back Pain

Keywords

  • Percutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation
  • Percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation
  • Percutaneous electrical stimulation
  • Motor control exercise
  • Multifidus
  • Abdominal transverse
  • Non-specific chronic low back pain
  • Transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation
  • Exercise therapy
03

In context

Back Pain

2,373 studies on the registry are indexed under Back Pain; 284 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 64 is close to the median of 60 across 1,941 interventional studies indexed under Back Pain.

Browse Back Pain studies →

Lead sponsor

Universidad Rey Juan Carlos is the lead sponsor of 111 studies on the registry; 22 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 65 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • Low back pain more than 90 days of evolution

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Spondylarthrosis
  • History of fractures, luxations, surgery and/or musculoskeletal disorders in low back and lower limb.
  • Leg pain or neuropathic pain (LANSS \<12).
  • Neurological disorders, inflammatory and/or degenerative diseases.
  • Having received as treatment techniques that involve needles on the previous 6 months to study enrollment or having received percutaneous electrical stimulation as a treatment before.
  • Physiotherapy treatment in the last 4 weeks.
  • Specific lumbar pathology, fibromyalgia, unstable cardiovascular diseases, pregnant women or under suspect of pregnancy.
  • Contraindications of needle's insertions: anticoagulant therapy, needle phobia, diabetes, hypothyroidism, lymphoedema, muscular diseases).
  • Contraindications of electrical current.
  • Drugs: morphine or opioids drugs.
  • Depression
  • Judicial dispute
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Double (Participant, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
64 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    PNMES plus exercise

    6-week intervention program with 3 treatment sessions of PNMES and motor control exercise program.

    Other: Percutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation (PNMES) plus motor control exercise program

  • Sham comparator
    Sham PNMES (introducing the needle) plus exercise

    Sham PNMES (introducing the needle) plus motor control exercise program

    Other: Sham PNMES (introducing the needle) plus motor control exercise program

  • Active comparator
    TENS plus exercise

    6-week intervention program with 3 treatment sessions of TENS plus motor control exercise program.

    Other: TENS plus motor control exercise program

  • Placebo comparator
    Placebo PNMES (without inserting the needle) plus exercise

    6-week intervention program with 3 treatment sessions of placebo PNMES (without inserting the needle) and exercise

    Other: Sham PNMES (without inserting the needle) plus motor control exercise program

Interventions

  • OtherPercutaneous neuromuscular electrical stimulation (PNMES) plus motor control exercise program

    The technique consists of a muscular stimulation of the deep lumbar multifidus by means of a TENS current applied through four dry needling or acupuncture needles introduced by ultrasound guidance in said muscle 30 minutes. This will add to a protocol of motor control exercises for deep abdominal and lumbar muscles.

    Also known as: Percutaneous electric nerve stimulation (PENS)

  • OtherSham PNMES (introducing the needle) plus motor control exercise program

    The same procedure will be performed as in the experimental treatment, but in this case, the electric current will be placebo and only the first 15 seconds will slightly notice it. This will add to a protocol of motor control exercises for deep abdominal and lumbar muscles.

    Also known as: Sham PENS

  • OtherTENS plus motor control exercise program

    Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation will be applied through 4 patches / adhesives placed in your lower back for 30 minutes. This will add to a protocol of motor control exercises for deep abdominal and lumbar muscles.

    Also known as: TENS

  • OtherSham PNMES (without inserting the needle) plus motor control exercise program

    The same procedure will be performed as in the experimental treatment, but in this case, the needle will not be inserted and the electric current will be placebo and only the first 15 seconds will slightly notice it. This will add to a protocol of motor control exercises for deep abdominal and lumbar muscles.

    Also known as: Sham PENS

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Increased cross-sectional area in activation

    The increase in height from the resting position to the submaximal contraction in the lumbar multifidus will be measured

    Time frame: Baseline, one hour from baseline after PNMES treatment 1, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  2. Changes in the measurements of the multifidus and tranverse of the abdomen at rest.

    Changes in the height of the multifidus at rest

    Time frame: Baseline, one hour from baseline after PNMES treatment 1, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

Secondary outcomes

  1. Intensity of Pain

    Will be measure with a line of 100 mmm (0 - no pain to 100- the worst pain) at rest and his best and worst pain in the last 24 hours.

    Time frame: (Baseline, one hour from baseline after PNMES treatment 1 (only at rest), 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  2. Pressure pain threshold using an algometer

    Measurement of pressure pain threshold in the paravertebral muscles, in the spinous process of L4, and the tibialis anterior muscle.

    Time frame: Baseline, one hour from baseline after PNMES treatment 1, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  3. Temporal summation

    Ten consecutives pressure pain stimulus will be conducted, pain intensity in the first, fifth and tenth will be asked. The difference from 1 to 10 will be the value that reports on the state of excitability of the posterior horn of the medulla

    Time frame: Baseline, one hour from baseline after PNMES treatment 1, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  4. Conditioned pain modulation

    First, pressure pain stimulus (test stimulus) will be conducted in the distal phalanx of the thumb. Second, occlusion cuff will be inflated around the arm of patient until the patient feeling a painful intensity (conditioned stimulus) of 6/10. Finally, after 30 seconds the stimulus will be done. The difference in the mean value of the initial algometry with the mean value of algometry during the conditioning stimulus will indicate the state of the descending pain inhibitory system.

    Time frame: Baseline, one hour from baseline after PNMES treatment 1, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  5. Pain Grade Questionnaire

    The scale assesses two dimensions: the intensity of pain and pain related to disability. It can be used in any chronic pathology including musculoskeletal problems and low back pain. It allows the graduation of the severity of chronic pain and the subsequent analysis of the qualitative changes for that pain. The scale has 7 items, which are of the Likert type of 11 points, with a total range of 0 to 70 points.

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  6. Oswestry Disability Index or Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire

    The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) is a validated, self-reported instrument used by clinicians and researchers to quantify disability for low back pain. The self-completed questionnaire contains ten topics concerning intensity of pain, lifting, ability to care for oneself, ability to walk, ability to sit, sexual function, ability to stand, social life, sleep quality, and ability to travel. Each topic category is followed by 6 statements describing different potential scenarios in the patient's life relating to the topic. The patient then checks the statement which most closely resembles their situation. Each question is scored on a scale of 0-5 with the first statement being zero and indicating the least amount of disability and the last statement is scored 5 indicating most severe disability. The scores for all questions answered are summed, then multiplied by two to obtain the index (range 0 to 100). Zero is equated with no disability and 100 is the maximum disability possible.

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  7. Short form 12 (SF-12) health survey (health-related quality of life)

    The SF-12 is a validated, health-related quality-of-life questionnaire consisting of twelve questions that measure eight health domains to assess physical and mental health. Physical health-related domains include General Health (GH), Physical Functioning (PF), Role Physical (RP), and Body Pain (BP). Mental health-related scales include Vitality (VT), Social Functioning (SF), Role Emotional (RE), and Mental Health (MH). The instrument has been validated across a number of chronic diseases and conditions. The response options of the SF-12 v2 form Likert-type scales that evaluate intensity or frequency. The number of answer options ranges from three to six, depending on the item, and each question is given a value which is then transformed into a scale from 0 to 100.

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  8. Kinesiophobia

    Tampa Scale for Kinesiophobia. To assess the fear of movement and pain-related fear. The 11 items are scored 1-4, with total scores ranging from 11 to 44. The addition of all the points obtained from each of the items results in the level of kinesiophobia, with higher scores indicating greater perceived kinesiophobia

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  9. Pain catastrophizing

    Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). This tool is a 13-item questionnaire designed to measure the three components of pain-related catastrophizing: rumination, magnification, and helplessness, resulting in a unique score. Each item is responded to on a 5-point scale (0 not at all, 4 all the time) relating the degree to which the individual experiences a thought or feeling of a painful situation.

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  10. The Becks Depression Inventory-II

    The Becks Depression Inventory-II is a validated, self-administered questionnaire consisting of 21 multiple choice questions. It is one of the most commonly used instruments to measure the severity of a depression. Possible scores range from 0 (no depression) to 63 (severe depression).

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  11. Anxiety

    The state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI) is a questionnaire that measures trait anxiety (a personality factor that predisposes the patient to suffer from anxiety) and the state of anxiety (environmental factors that protect or generate anxiety). Each of the two sub-scales (trait anxiety and state anxiety) consists of 20 items, ranging from 0 (nothing) to 3 (a lot).

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  12. Global Rating of Change Scale

    Global Rating of Change (GRoC) scales provide a means of measuring self-perceived change in health status. Possible scores range from -5 (very much worse), through 0 (unchanged) to +5 (completely recovered).

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

  13. Blinding the patient

    The patients of the sham groups will be asked after the interventions of PNMES if they belonged to the group of deep electro-stimulation, being able to content: Sure that yes, moderately that yes, I do not know, moderately that no or sure that no.

    Time frame: 1 hour from baseline after the PNMES treatment 1, 2 weeks from baseline after the second PNMES treatment and 4 weeks from baseline after the third PNMES treatment

  14. Central Sensitization Inventory

    The Spanish version of the Central Sensitisation Inventory will be used to identify symptoms related to central sensitisation. It is a self-report questionnaire that assesses a total of 25 sensitisation-associated symptoms on a 5-point Likert scale. The total score ranges from 0 to 100, where \>40/100 points suggest the presence of sensitisation-associated symptoms. It has been found to have high reliability and validity.

    Time frame: Baseline, 6 weeks from baseline, 18 weeks from baseline and 30 weeks from baseline

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • Universidad Rey Juan Carlos
    Alcorcon, Madrid 28922, Spain
    • Josue Fernández-Carnero, PhD · Contact · josue.fernandez@urjc.es · +34914888949
    • Josue Fernandez-Carnero, PhD · Principal investigator
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on May 15, 2023, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT04243915
Lead sponsor
Universidad Rey Juan Carlos
Responsible party
Josue Fernandez Carnero (PhD, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jan 28, 2020
Start date
Apr 10, 2021
Primary completion
Jun 10, 2024 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 10, 2024 (estimated)
Last update
May 15, 2023

Study contacts

Alberto Arribas-Roamno, MsC
Contact
albertoarribasromano@gmail.com
635937520
Josue Fernández-Carnero, PhD
principal investigator · Universidad Rey Juan Carlos

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion