The efficacy of action potential therapy, as well as the relative effectiveness of two different action potential therapy electrode placements (abdominal versus paraspinal) in the management of irritable bowel syndrome

Abstract

The aim of this placebo-controlled\xB7 trial was to investigate the efficacy of action potential therapy (APT) versus placebo, and the relative effectiveness of abdominal versus paraspinal electrode placement, in the treatment of Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS). Convenience sampling was used to recruit sixty patients with IBS from the community. These patients were randomly divided into four groups (A, B, C and D). Each group consisted of 15 patients, aged between 20 and 69 years. Patients attended five consultations over three weeks. Treatment was given with either active or placebo APT during the first four consultations. The fifth consultation was for data collection only. Patients in group A and C both received active APT. In group A, the electrodes were placed over the abdomen, while in group C the electrodes were placed paraspinally. Patients in group Band 0 both received placebo APT using a placebo APT device. In group B, the electrodes were placed over the abdomen, while in group 0, the electrodes were placed paraspinally. The measures of efficacy were the IBS Quality of Life Questionnaire (IBS-QOl), the Shortform McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ) and the life line Stress Questionnaire (ll-SQ). Using these questionnaires, data was collected at the 1st. 3rd and s' consultations for each participant. The data was then analysed using the SPSS package. Assessment of intragroup and inter-group change was performed using Friedman's T-test and the Mann-Whitney U-Tests respectively. Analysis was performed at the 95% confidence level. Patients in all four groups showed a,n improvement in quality of life (measured by the IBSQOl), as well as in the perceived quantity of pain experienced (measured by the SF-MPQ), between initial and final consultations. As regards the patients' levels of stress (measured by the ll-SQ), there was no statistically significant improvement in any of the four groups between initial and final consultations. Inter-group comparison of the data showed a higher perceived quantity of pain in the active, paraspinally placed APT group (group C) at the first consultation when compared to both the