PTRCTPhysiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapy2025

Acute Effect of Percutaneous Tibial Nerve Stimulation on Postural Control: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Miguel Rodríguez-Rosal, Alberto Sánchez-Sixto, Francisco Álvarez-Barbosa and 1 others

PMID 40839635

WHAT IT FOUND

Percutaneous tibial nerve stimulation did not improve postural control more than sham needling or no treatment.

Both needle groups showed reduced sway with eyes closed compared to their own baseline, but there were no significant differences between the groups.

Key findings

01No statistically significant differences were detected when comparing the experimental, sham, and control groups.

02Both the PTNS and sham groups showed reduced center of pressure displacement with eyes closed at 24 and 48 hours compared to baseline, but the control group did not.

03The sham intervention involved deep needle insertion without electrical current, which may have produced neurophysiological responses similar to the active treatment.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study included only male participants, limiting generalizability to women. The sample consisted of healthy, physically active young adults, so findings may not apply to injured or older populations. The sham intervention involved deep needle insertion, which may have elicited physiological responses that confounded the comparison with active PTNS. The intervention was a single acute session; long-term effects were not assessed.

Declared interests

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not interpret the within-group improvements in the PTNS and sham groups as evidence that PTNS works. Since there were no significant differences between the PTNS, sham, and control groups, the changes may be due to the needling sensation, natural variation, or other non-specific effects rather than the electrical stimulation itself.

Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →