Why the study?
The role of autonomic nervous system modulation in chronic neck pain remains elusive.
Does transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (t-VNS) improve heart rate variability, pain perception, and neck disability in participants with chronic neck pain?
Does transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (t-VNS) improve heart rate variability, pain perception, and neck disability in participants with chronic neck pain?
Transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation combined with standard physiotherapy significantly improves heart rate variability, pain, and functional disability in patients with chronic neck pain compared to physiotherapy alone or with biofeedback.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
t-VNS plus physiotherapy outperforms biofeedback or standard care for HRV, pain, and disability in chronic neck pain; extends ANS modulation evidence to this population.
Background: The role of autonomic nervous system (ANS) modulation in chronic neck pain remains elusive. Transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (t-VNS) provides a novel, non-invasive means of potentially mitigating chronic neck pain. This study aimed to assess the effects of ANS modulation on heart rate variability (HRV), pain perception, and neck disability. Methods: In this double-blind randomized clinical trial, 102 participants with chronic neck pain were randomly allocated to one of three groups: t-VNS plus standard-care physiotherapy (SC-PT), heart rate variability biofeedback (HRV-BF) with SC-PT, or SC-PT alone. Interventions were administered three times weekly for 6 weeks. The following outcome measures were assessed at baseline and after 6 weeks: HRV, the visual analog scale (VAS), the pressure pain threshold (PPT), and the neck disability index (NDI). Results: The t-VNS group exhibited significant improvements compared to the HRV-BF and SC-PT groups. Specifically, t-VNS increased the RR interval (mean difference [MD] = 35.0 ms; p = 0.037) and decreased the average heart rate (MD = −5.4 bpm; p = 0.039). Additionally, t-VNS reduced the VAS scores (versus HRV-BF: MD = −0.8 cm, p = 0.044; SC-PT: MD = −0.9 cm, p = 0.018), increased the PPT (versus HRV-BF: MD = 94.4 kPa, p < 0.001; SC-PT (MD = 56.2 kPa, p = 0.001)), and lowered the NDI scores (versus HRV-BF: MD = −4.0, p = 0.015; SC-PT: MD = −5.9, p < 0.001). Conclusions: t-VNS demonstrated superior effectiveness compared to HRV-BF and SC-PT in regulating HRV, alleviating pain, and enhancing functional capabilities in individuals with chronic neck pain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alkhawajah et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: