Effect of low frequency electrical stimulation on chronic wound healing: report of 48 patients

Abstract

Objective To explore the effect of low frequency electrical stimulation on chronic wound healing. Methods Forty-eight patients with chronic wounds who were treated in our hospital from September 2017 to September 2020 were enrolled in this study. The course of disease ranged from 31 to 65 d, and there were 15 cases of infectious ulcer, 27 cases of diabetic ulcer and 6 cases of connective tissue ulcer. All the patients were treated by following the principle of TIME (wound evaluation, infection control, maintenance of wet balance, promotion of wound edge epithelialization), and were randomly divided into the observation group and the control group. Besides the routine dressing change given to the both group, those from the observation group were treated with Dutch ultrasound electrotherapy workstation Myomed632VUX (frequency 100 Hz, wave rise ∶wave drop to 3 s ∶3 s, current intensity 15 mA) for 30 min, once a day, 5 times per week. The wound healing (eKare inSight 3D Wound Measurement), infection control and blood perfusion of the wound (PeriScan PIMⅡ Blood Perfusion Imager) before and after each low frequency electrical stimulation were compared between the 2 groups at 3, 7, 14 and 21 d after treatment. Results There were significant differences in wound healing between the 2 groups at different time points (P < 0.05). The chronic wound healing rate was as high as (87.59±5.81)% in the observation group in 14 d after treatment. Low frequency electrical stimulation resulted in well controlled infection in the observation group at 8.83±5.75 d, which was significantly earlier than that in the control group (12.41±9.52 d, P < 0.01). At each time of electrical stimulation, the amount of blood perfusion in the wound of the observation group was significantly larger than that in the control group, and continued to increase after being separated from electrical stimulation. And on the 3rd day, the blood perfusion of wound in the observation group was remarkably larger than that in the control group (287.22±13.14 vs 155.20±5.62 PU, P < 0.01), and the difference was increased gradually with the elapse of time (P < 0.01). Conclusion Low frequency electrical stimulation can promote chronic wound healing, shorten the time of wound infection control and increase wound blood perfusion.

Keywords

• electrical stimulation therapy
• chronic wound
• wound healing
• blood perfusion