The journal of the American Academy of Medical Acupuncture with acupuncture research articles, reviews, abstracts and case studies.      
             
     

Medical Acupuncture
A Journal For Physicians By Physicians

Volume 13 / Number 1
"Aurum Nostrum Non Est Aurum Vulgi"

     
     
Table of Contents       On-line Journal Index
     
     

 

Piezoelectric Stimulation Of Acupuncture Points For The Treatment Of Back And
Neck Pain: A Discussion Of 3 Case Reports

Dein M. Shapiro, MD


ABSTRACT
Background Back and neck pain are common in medical practice. Usual treatment involves pharmacotherapy, including narcotics, and takes days or weeks to effect symptom resolution. In contrast, the application of piezoelectric stimulation to standard acupuncture points can be a quick and effective modality for back pain.
Objective To illustrate the use of piezoelectric stimulation for back and neck pain.
Design, Setting, and Patients Case series of patients seeking alleviation of back or neck pain.
Intervention Piezoelectric stimulation of acupuncture points, particularly BL 60, GB 34, and GB 39.
Main Outcome Measure Resolution of pain following treatment.
Results Three patients are discussed who presented with a range of symptoms, both acute and chronic. After 1 or 2 sessions of piezoelectric stimulation of acupuncture points, all 3 patients reported resolution of pain. Long-term follow-up revealed no pain recurrence.
Conclusion Piezoelectric stimulation appears to be an effective approach for both acute and chronic neck and back pain. While no adverse effects were seen in this series, controlled trials are necessary and the device remains investigational.

KEY WORDS
Piezoelectric Stimulation, Back Pain, Neck Pain, Acupuncture

INTRODUCTION
Back and neck pain are common problems in medical practice. The initial treatment modalities include immobilization, thermotherapy, and medication that often comprises oral or injectable narcotics. The time frame of recovery can be days or weeks and frequently requires additional physical therapy. This article describes a new modality that appears to be safe and effective. Most patients treated with this method show some improvement within 30 minutes. They do not require injectable medication and the use of oral narcotics is curtailed. The author has treated hundreds of patients for musculoskeletal pain with this technique. The most common indication has been neck or back pain. This modality is described in detail, and 3 cases are herein reported: 1 for neck, 1 for mid back, and 1 for low back pain.

Piezoelectricity

Pierre and Jacque Curie discovered the piezoelectric phenomenon in the 1880s. They showed that some crystals produce electric potentials when deformed by pressure. Piezoelectric devices have a variety of common uses. They are found in crystal microphones and diagnostic ultrasound transducers, and they are often used to produce the spark that ignites gas grills.

Piezoelectric stimulators for self-treatment are widely available over-the-counter (OTC), despite the fact that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lists them as investigational devices. Unlike the OTC versions, the medical devices are produced to strict standards and have a defined output. The device's specifications include a short pulse duration of 12 microseconds, a peak voltage of 10,000, and a monophasic spike waveform.1 It is held in 1 hand and activated by depressing a button with the thumb.

If the examiner is grounded to the patient, both will feel a mild but tolerable shock. If a grounding device is used, the patient will experience a mild shock between the device and grounding pole, and the examiner will feel nothing.

Probable Mechanism of Action
The use of acupuncture needles to induce a flow of electrical energy along the meridians is well documented.2(pp19-24) Although not as refined as needles, the piezoelectric device appears to polarize the meridian and produce a similar effect. The most superficial meridians, tendinomuscular meridians (TMMs), are commonly stimulated to treat acute strains and sprains.2(pp103-116) The TMMs exist in broad bands in the superficial dermis and fascia. Even though the ting and gathering points are not used, the TMMs appear to be readily activated by piezoelectric devices. The device may also simultaneously influence the principal meridians.

The TMM of the bladder (BL) courses up the back of the legs, over the buttocks, up the back and neck, and over the top of the head. Its area of influence is ideally suited for neck and back pain. The gallbladder (GB) TMM courses up the side of the legs, over the hip, up the side of the trunk, across the shoulder, and up the side of the head. Its stimulation is well suited for lumbar pain that radiates to the hip and/or down the leg laterally. The small intestine (SI) TMM begins at the tip of the
5th finger, courses up the medial side of the forearm and arm, over the shoulder, and up the side of the neck to the side of the face. Its stimulation is ideally suited for shoulder and neck pain.

TREATMENT
Upper back and neck pain is treated by stimulating SI 4 and BL 58 bilaterally. A typical treatment involves 10 stimulations (at 1-second intervals) on each point for a total treatment of 40 stimulations. At the 1st treatment, half (5 stimulations per point) can be given initially. The 2nd half of the treatment can be administered 10-15 minutes later, after reassessing the patient.

Lower and mid-back pain is treated using BL 60, GB 34, and GB 39. An average treatment involves 10 stimulations on the bladder line (BL 60) and 10 on the gallbladder line (5 each on GB 34 and GB 39) bilaterally for a total of 40 stimulations. Severe low back pain or significant pain in a large patient (weighing >200 lb [90 kg]) may require 60 or 80 stimulations distributed over these points. If the pain is mostly central, the treatment can be weighted more heavily on the bladder line. If there is significant lateral radiation of the pain, the gallbladder meridian can be favored.

It takes only 1-2 minutes to complete a treatment that typically can be repeated 2 or 3 times the 1st week, 1 or 2 times the 2nd week, and then weekly until symptoms resolve.

CASE REPORTS
Patient 1. A 52-year-old woman presented with chronic neck pain of 2 years' duration and recent left-hand numbness. The patient had limited range of motion in the neck but was neurologically intact. A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan revealed cervical straightening due to muscle spasm, and degenerative arthritis at C3-4 and C4-5. This patient received 10 stimulations to SI 4 and BL 58 bilaterally for a total of 40 stimulations. Within 20-30 minutes, she noted an increased range of motion and a modest diminution in pain. She was instructed to take OTC anti-inflammatory medication and was given a referral for physiotherapy. The next morning, the patient stated that her neck pain had resolved completely.

Eleven weeks later, the patient reported the return of neck pain and stiffness after a symptom-free interval of 9-10 weeks. The physical examination revealed limited range of motion in the neck with left-sided tenderness. She also complained of low back stiffness and had tenderness over the left sacroiliac joint. A 2nd treatment of 40 stimulations was given, weighted to the left side, and with some attention to the lower back. Treatment integrated the left side: BL 60 (10), SI 4 (10), GB 34 (5), GB 39 (5); and right side: BL 60 (5), SI 4 (5). Sixteen months after the last treatment, the patient reported no recurrence of symptoms.

Patient 2. A 34-year-old woman presented with acute, moderately severe mid-back pain that occurred suddenly as she lifted a heavy object and rotated her trunk. The physical examination findings were normal except for limited flexion and rotation of the spine due to pain in the paraspinous muscles of the mid back. This patient was treated with 10 stimulations on BL 60, and 5 stimulations on both GB 34 and GB 39 bilaterally for a total of 40 stimulations. She reported a 30% reduction in pain almost immediately. She was instructed in thermotherapy and rest was advised. Ibuprofen was prescribed at a dosage of 600 mg orally 3 times daily, and a mild narcotic was given for episodes of severe pain. The patient reported that the pain resolved over 5-7 days after treatment. She used little ibuprofen and no narcotic. Telephone contact 90 days later revealed that the patient remained symptom-free.

Patient 3.
A 275-lb (124-kg) obese 39-year-old man with a history of chronic low back pain and recurrent episodes of acute low back strain presented with sudden, severe, and disabling pain that occurred when he bent over. The pain radiated into the right buttock and prevented him from climbing onto the examination table. At the time of his initial examination, he stood at the end of the table leaning slightly forward and gripping the table with both hands. He was immobile and requested injectable narcotics that had relieved him previously. Permission was obtained to treat him with piezoelectric stimulation instead of with injectable narcotics.

The initial treatment was done in the standing position with 10 stimulations to BL 60, and 5 stimulations each to GB 34 and GB 39 bilaterally (for a total of 40 stimulations). Twenty minutes later, the patient had sufficient relief to allow a proper examination with the patient standing, sitting, or lying on the table. Due to his size and the severity of the pain, the initial treatment of 40 stimulations was repeated before he left. (This total treatment of 80 stimulations was justified by the patient's size and severity of his pain.) He left the office fully ambulatory and walking upright. Bed rest was advised, along with his anti-inflammatory medication.

Seven days later, the patient reported that the treatment had given him significant relief for 4 days, but the pain had gradually recurred. He was re-treated only on the affected side with 20 stimulations (10 stimulations each at BL 60 and GB 34). This treatment was also repeated at the end of the 2nd week; shortly after this 3rd treatment, the patient reported approximately 80% improvement and returned to work. He was instructed in home exercise. Resolution of symptoms made further visits unnecessary.

DISCUSSION
Piezoelectric stimulation of acupuncture points may not be as popular or detailed a treatment as needle acupuncture, but it appears to be an effective method for the treatment of acute, subacute, and chronic back and neck pain. For many acupuncturists who treat adults, it may be a temporary solution until the patient can be scheduled for a full treatment. Yet my experience has proven piezoelectric stimulation to be adequate as primary therapy for many patients. For pediatric practitioners, it may represent a useful new modality that is not generally perceived as noxious to children older than 5-6 years. For family practitioners and other medical generalists, piezoelectric devices could represent a powerful introduction to the acupuncture-related modalities, and their usefulness in the treatment of common medical problems.

Despite the fact that this device is available OTC, it is still listed as "investigational" by the FDA, therefore requiring patients' informed consent prior to its use clinically by licensed medical personnel. (In the consent process, it is important to admit that the efficacy of the device has not been proven and its adverse effects unknown. My patients described herein consented to treatment and noted no complications from this procedure.) However, controlled clinical trials are necessary before this method can be recommended for wide use.

CONCLUSION

Considering that this device delivers a relatively high monophasic voltage spike, the wisdom of making it available without prescription is questionable. Experience has shown the OTC devices to be relatively harmless and largely ineffective. The true medical potential of this device becomes apparent only when it is used to stimulate a group of distal (below the knee or elbow) acupuncture points designed to "move energy." To accomplish this, the therapist must be isolated electrically from the process and stimulate each point repeatedly. This converts the process into a potent medical modality that should be performed only under medical supervision, and which is quite appropriately not recommended in the instructions for any of the OTC devices. It is possible, nonetheless, that some patients with proper training could stimulate themselves with these devices as part of a comprehensive plan of medical management.

REFERENCES
1. OMS Medical Supplies Catalog. Braintree, Mass; 1992-1993:34-35.
2. Helms JM. Acupuncture Energetics: A Clinical Approach for Physicians. Berkeley, Calif: Medical Acupuncture Publishers; 1995.

AUTHOR INFORMATION
Dr Dein Shapiro is Board-certified in Family Practice and in Medical Acupuncture, and is a Fellow of the American Academy of Family Physicians. Dr Shapiro is a Clinical Associate Professor of Family Practice at The University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, New Jersey, and is in private practice in Branchburg, New Jersey.

Dein M. Shapiro, MD
3461 Route 22
Branchburg, NJ 08876
Phone: 908-526-4499 o Fax: 908-526-4495 o E-mail: Boxwood@aol.com

     
     

Back to Top | Table of Contents | On-line Journal Index