To examine the effect of varying frequency, intensity, and pulse duration of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) on primary hyperalgesia (increased response to a noxious stimuli) to heat and mechanical stimuli induced by carrageenan paw inflammation in rats.
Inflammation was induced by injection of 3% carrageenan into the hindpaw. Two frequencies (high, 100 Hz; low, 4 Hz), 2 intensities (high, motor; low, sensory), and 2 pulse durations (100 microsec, 250 microsec) were applied for 20 minutes to the inflamed paw. The paw withdrawal latency (PWL) to radiant heat, threshold to mechanical stimuli, and spontaneous pain-related behaviors were measured before and 4 hours after induction of inflammation, after TENS, and at 8, 12, and 24 hours after inflammation. A 3-factor (frequency, intensity, pulse duration) repeated-measures (time) design was used to analyze the changes in PWL. Mechanical threshold and spontaneous pain-related behaviors were compared for frequency, intensity, and pulse duration with a Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance.
For changes in PWL to heat, there was an effect for time (p = .0001) and frequency (p =.0001), but not for intensity (p = .45) or pulse duration (p = .21). For changes in mechanical threshold, there was also an effect for frequency (p = .007), but not for intensity (p = .055) or pulse duration (p = .058), after treatment with TENS. High-frequency TENS significantly reduced the primary hyperalgesia to heat and mechanical stimuli when compared with controls receiving no TENS or treatment with low-frequency TENS. High-frequency motor TENS also reduced spontaneous pain-related behaviors for 1 day after treatment.
High-frequency TENS reduces primary hyperalgesia to heat and mechanical stimuli for up to 1 day after treatment. In contrast, low-frequency TENS is ineffective in reducing primary hyperalgesia. Varying intensity or pulse duration had no effect on the degree of antihyperalgesia produced by high-frequency TENS.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 September 2025.
All research outputs
#7,610,295
of 34,457,357 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
#2,154
of 7,824 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,677
of 57,542 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation
#16
of 38 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,457,357 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,824 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 57,542 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 38 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.
