Volume 34, Issue 241 (1-2025)
J Mazandaran Univ Med Sci 2025, 34(241): 42-54 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Ezzati E, Mahooti R, Kavyannejad F, Paran M S, Almasi A, Kavyannejad R. Effects of Cathodal and Anodal Direct Current Electrical Stimulation on Pain Levels During Intramuscular Injection: A Triple-Blinded Randomized Clinical Trial. J Mazandaran Univ Med Sci 2025; 34 (241) :42-54
URL: http://jmums.mazums.ac.ir/article-1-21329-en.html
URL: http://jmums.mazums.ac.ir/article-1-21329-en.html
Ebrahim Ezzati 
, Roghaye Mahooti , Fatemah Kavyannejad , Mohamad Sadegh Paran , Afshin Almasi , Rasoul Kavyannejad
, Roghaye Mahooti , Fatemah Kavyannejad , Mohamad Sadegh Paran , Afshin Almasi , Rasoul Kavyannejad
Abstract: (530 Views)
Background and purpose: Intramuscular injection (IM) of medications is an invasive and painful procedure for many patients. Various forms of electrical stimulation may play a role in pain modulation. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of cathodal and anodal direct current (DC) on reducing pain caused by IM injections.
Materials and methods: This study was conducted as a triple-blinded, randomized clinical trial on 120 patients who were candidates for IM. Patients in the control group did not receive any intervention. In the cathodal and anodal groups, direct current (DC) with a current intensity of 5 mA was applied via a connection to the needle tip during the injection. In the anesthetic group, EMLA ointment was applied locally. The pain level was measured based on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) immediately after the injection and at 1,3-, and 5-minutes post-injection. Heart rate changes, injection duration, and injection frequency were also recorded. Data were analyzed using one-way and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests, as well as repeated measures.
Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of age (P=0.2), gender (P=0.83), and body mass index (P=0.056). The pain level was significantly lower in the groups receiving anesthetic ointment (P<0.01), anodal (P<0.001), and cathodal (P<0.0001) direct current stimulation compared to the control group. Moreover, pain levels in the cathodal group were significantly lower than those in the anodal group (P<0.01) and the anesthetic group (P<0.05). The injection time was significantly shorter in the intervention groups than in the control group (P<0.0001), while there was no significant difference in the frequency of attempts required to perform a successful injection between the groups (P>0.05). The increase in heart rate was significantly lower in the intervention groups than in the control group during and after the injection (P<0.05), while no significant difference was observed between the intervention groups (P>0.05).
Conclusion: Applying electrical stimulation directly to the needle insertion area effectively reduced the pain and tachycardia caused by IM. Greater analgesic effects were observed with cathodal stimulation.
(Clinical Trials Registry Number: IRCT20240123060780N1)
Materials and methods: This study was conducted as a triple-blinded, randomized clinical trial on 120 patients who were candidates for IM. Patients in the control group did not receive any intervention. In the cathodal and anodal groups, direct current (DC) with a current intensity of 5 mA was applied via a connection to the needle tip during the injection. In the anesthetic group, EMLA ointment was applied locally. The pain level was measured based on the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) immediately after the injection and at 1,3-, and 5-minutes post-injection. Heart rate changes, injection duration, and injection frequency were also recorded. Data were analyzed using one-way and two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests, as well as repeated measures.
Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the groups in terms of age (P=0.2), gender (P=0.83), and body mass index (P=0.056). The pain level was significantly lower in the groups receiving anesthetic ointment (P<0.01), anodal (P<0.001), and cathodal (P<0.0001) direct current stimulation compared to the control group. Moreover, pain levels in the cathodal group were significantly lower than those in the anodal group (P<0.01) and the anesthetic group (P<0.05). The injection time was significantly shorter in the intervention groups than in the control group (P<0.0001), while there was no significant difference in the frequency of attempts required to perform a successful injection between the groups (P>0.05). The increase in heart rate was significantly lower in the intervention groups than in the control group during and after the injection (P<0.05), while no significant difference was observed between the intervention groups (P>0.05).
Conclusion: Applying electrical stimulation directly to the needle insertion area effectively reduced the pain and tachycardia caused by IM. Greater analgesic effects were observed with cathodal stimulation.
(Clinical Trials Registry Number: IRCT20240123060780N1)
Type of Study: Research(Original) |
Subject:
nursing
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
Articles Copyright © The Author(s). Owned by Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences.
Contact Us
Address: Journal Office, Building No. 2, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Moallem Square, Sari.Tel: +98 (011)34484874 Postal code: 48175-866 E-Mail: jmums@mazums.ac.ir Telefax: +98 (011)33262679
