Evidence Of Microcurrent Therapy's Effectiveness In Tissue Repair
A recent review of the published literature identified n=11 studies that were of sufficient quality to merit inclusion (7x RCTs; 2x experimental studies, not controlled; 1x case series and 1x comparative study) [1-11]. A total of 379 patients were involved in these trials with 66% being exposed to Microcurrent Therapy.
Microcurrent Therapy was deemed to be effective in 10 of the 11 publications (91%), employing 96% of all trial participants (n=363). The ineffective trial was reference 6, Ho et al,. (2007). The clinical conditions treated in these 10 studies included, 2x tennis elbow; 2x total knee arthroplasty (post-operative); achilles tendinopathy; groin strain; head/neck fibrosis; inflammation (lab-induced); plantar fasciitis and temporomandibular disorder.
Overall, in relation to clinical healing/repair issues, there is more supportive published evidence than evidence suggesting an ineffective treatment. Adverse events/effects reporting identifies no significant issues or risks. On balance, Microcurrent based therapy has supportive evidence of effectiveness across a wide range of clinical injury and repair presentations. The ‘stimulation' parameters from the effective studies were identified in a dose/response analysis and fell into what is now considered to be an effective range.