Layout Image

Scientific publications and clinical trials

The full versions of these papers are available on request. If you would like to read more, please let me know and I will be happy to email or post you a copy.

A note regarding terminology: The names Scenar and InterX refer to INS devices which operate on the same principles but which were developed in different countries (Russia and USA respectively).

Non-invasive interactive neurostimulation in the post-operative recovery of patients with a trochanteric fracture of the femur

I G Gorodetskyi, A I Gorodnichenko, P S Tursin, V K Reshetnyak and O N Uskov

The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery: November 2007 Volume 89 (11) p 1488

A RANDOMISED, CONTROLLED TRIAL

Clinical trial involving 60 patients with fractured hips. Patients were randomised into two groups post stabilisation. One group received post-operative treatment using INS, other group received treatment with a sham device. The group receiving INS showed better recovery (as assessed by visual analogue scale for pain, brief pain inventory & Ketorolac for post-operative control of pain, assessment by surgeon). P< 0.001.

Though pain was comparable for both groups immediately after operation, after the first session the INS group reported a drop from an average of 9.0 to 4.0, whereas the sham group reported a drop from an average of 8.8 to 7.3. Statistical analysis showed that this difference between the groups was highly significant (p<0.001). At the end of the study, the INS group had an average pain rating of 1.0 whereas the sham group had an average rating of 5.3. In addition, the INS group used much less Ketorolac (self-administered pain medication) than the sham group.

With respect to the surgeon’s assessment, all the members of the sham group were deemed to have “no improvement”, “minimal” or “average” improvement. In contrast, all those in the INS group were reported as showing “substantial improvement” or “full recovery”. It is important to note that the surgeon performing the assessments had no knowledge of which patients had been receiving the INS treatment and therefore could not have been influenced by any vested interest.

The authors report that patients who had received the INS could have been released from hospital earlier than the patients who had received treatment from the sham device.

15th International Conference of Scenar Therapists, Dubrovnik, Croatia 2009

Click here to read presentations.