Effectiveness of Microcurrent Therapy for Treating Pressure Ulcers in Older People: A Double-Blind, Controlled, Randomized Clinical Trial

Juan Avendaño-Coy, Noelia M. Martín-Espinosa (), Arturo Ladriñán-Maestro, Julio Gómez-Soriano, María Isabel Suárez-Miranda and Purificación López-Muñoz
Additional contact information
Juan Avendaño-Coy: Faculty of Physiotherapy and Nursing of Toledo, University of Castilla-La Mancha, 45071 Toledo, Spain
Noelia M. Martín-Espinosa: Faculty of Physiotherapy and Nursing of Toledo, University of Castilla-La Mancha, 45071 Toledo, Spain
Arturo Ladriñán-Maestro: Rest Home Montes de Toledo, 45460 Manzaneque, Spain
Julio Gómez-Soriano: Faculty of Physiotherapy and Nursing of Toledo, University of Castilla-La Mancha, 45071 Toledo, Spain
María Isabel Suárez-Miranda: Nursing Home San Diego, 45600 Talavera de la Reina, Spain
Purificación López-Muñoz: Faculty of Physiotherapy and Nursing of Toledo, University of Castilla-La Mancha, 45071 Toledo, Spain

IJERPH, 2022, vol. 19, issue 16, 1-11

Abstract: The aim of this study was to assess the effectiveness of microcurrent therapy for healing pressure ulcers in aged people. A multicentric, randomized clinical trial was designed with a sham stimulation control. The experimental group received an intervention following a standardized protocol for curing ulcers combined with 10 h of microcurrent therapy daily for 25 days. The sham group received the same curing protocol plus a sham microcurrent stimulation. The studied healing-related variables were the Pressure Ulcer Scale for Healing (PUSH) and the surface, depth, grade, and number of ulcers that healed completely. Three evaluations were conducted: pre-intervention (T1), 14 days following the start of the intervention (T2), and 1 day after the intervention was completed (T3). In total, 30 participants met the inclusion criteria ( n = 15 in each group). The improvement in the PUSH at T2 and T3 was 16.8% (CI95% 0.5–33.1) and 25.3% (CI95% 7.6–43.0) greater in the experimental group versus the sham control, respectively. The reduction in the wound area at T2 and T3 was 20.1% (CI95% 5.2–35.0) and 28.6% (CI95% 11.9–45.3) greater in the experimental group versus the control, respectively. Microcurrent therapy improves the healing of pressure ulcers in older adults, both quantitatively and qualitatively.

Keywords: aged 80 and over; electric stimulation; electric stimulation therapy; nursing care; pressure ulcer wound healing (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/16/10045/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/16/10045/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:16:p:10045-:d:888255

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().