Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation and heat to reduce pain in a chronic low back pain population: a randomized controlled clinical trial.
Featured on Physle Daily · Tuesday, 20 October 2026
Chronic low back pain is notoriously hard to treat, and clinicians often look for low-risk, accessible add-on tools like heat and TENS to help manage it. This trial compared a combined heat and TENS treatment against a no-treatment control group that continued usual care, in 50 people with chronic low back pain lasting at least three months. After four weeks, the treatment did not lower pain scores compared to control. It did produce a statistically significant increase in pressure pain thresholds, a measure of how much pressure is needed before pain is felt, at both the lower back and a distant site on the foot.
This pattern, pain unchanged but pain sensitivity measures shifted, is interesting but comes from a small trial without a sham comparison, so attention effects cannot be ruled out, and the clinical relevance of the threshold changes remains uncertain.
If you live with chronic low back pain, you may have heard that heat and TENS, a mild electrical stimulation applied to the skin, can help ease discomfort. This small study tested that combination in 50 people with low back pain lasting three months or longer, comparing it to a group that received no treatment and just continued their usual care. The result: people receiving heat and TENS didn't report less pain than those who received no treatment.
However, a separate measure, how much pressure it took before pain was felt at the back and at a point on the foot, did improve in the treatment group. This doesn't necessarily mean the treatment relieved pain itself. Because the control group received no treatment at all, part of any benefit seen could come from extra attention rather than the heat and TENS specifically.
With only 50 participants, these findings are preliminary and shouldn't be taken as proof that this approach works or doesn't work for pain relief.
This is a summary of research, not medical advice. Talk to your own healthcare provider about anything affecting your care.
This trial speaks to a common clinical question: does combining heat with TENS offer measurable benefit for chronic low back pain beyond no intervention at all? In this randomized controlled trial of 50 participants (25 per group), the combined intervention did not produce statistically significant reductions in pain scores compared to a no-treatment control group that continued usual care, over four weeks. What did change significantly, in the treatment group only, was pressure pain threshold at both the lumbar region and a remote site (second toe), measured at 30 minutes and again at four weeks. This secondary finding suggests a possible effect on pain sensitivity or central pain processing, but since the abstract does not report a direct between-group statistical comparison for this outcome beyond stating it was significant only in the experimental group, and since the control arm had no sham or attention-matched comparator, expectation or contact effects cannot be excluded. The abstract does not report adverse events, so no safety conclusions can be drawn.
Given the small sample and lack of blinding or sham control, these results should be read as exploratory signals regarding pain sensitivity rather than evidence that heat and TENS meaningfully reduce chronic low back pain itself.
In this 50-person randomized trial, combined heat and TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation) did not reduce pain scores compared to a no-treatment control group over four weeks.
Pressure pain thresholds at the lower back and second toe improved significantly only in the treatment group, both 30 minutes after treatment and at four weeks.
The control group received no treatment and simply continued usual care, so any benefit seen could partly reflect attention or contact with researchers rather than the treatment itself.
Source
Brazilian journal of physical therapy
Leemans L, Elma Ö, Nijs J et al. · 2021
doi: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2020.04.001