Hi Sarah,
Likon is a concept that was developed in China by Professor Jiang Xiao Wen
in the 1970's and a machine was launched worldwhile by Healthtronics Pte
Limited in Singapore in 1987.
Likon is described by the operation manual as 'Modulation Electro Therapy
(MET), it generates mid frequency 2KHz to 5 KHz that are modulated by a low
frequency current ranging from 5 to 100 Hz. The mid frequency acts as a
carried wave, 'carrying' the low frequency pulses deep into the tissues.
Unlike IF therapy which utilises 2 medium frequency waves to produce a low
frequency 'beat' at their intersection. Likon generates mid frequency waves
that are modulated by low frequency pulses, thus combining the
characteristics and advantage of mid and low frequency stimulation via a
single output.
The list of applications was long ranging from musculoskeletal to
neurological conditions.
The above was deduced from the machine manual.
In reality, to my knowledge, there are no published paper on the Likon. I
have seen a few articles on Likons but these were confined to undergraduate
dissertations in the early 1990's. I have seen Likons in action at my local
hospitals, yes, they are around and it seems that there are pockets of epa
community in UK that 'swear' by the efficacy of this modality.
Anyone who uses this modality would like to further comment on this.
Regards,
Kam
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sarah Fern Striffler [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>Sent: 20 October 2000 06:45
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: THE ELECTROTHERAPY ISSUE
>
>
>Dear Henry,
>
>What is Likon & now is it used for psoas?
>
>Thank you.
>
>Sarah Fern Striffler, PT
>
>
>Henry Tsao wrote:
>
>> To Mr Cheng, Bruce, and others who are interested in this
>contraversial
>> field of electrotherapy:
>>
>> I have been following the debate recently between the EPA
>and Bruce, and
>> since I started this whole contraversial debate, I thought I
>might go and
>> have a look a the latest literature on electrotherapy. I
>don't believe in
>> personal attacks, and think that physiotherapists should be
>able to make up
>> their minds on the issue.
>>
>> Before I go on, I will just explain. I work in a busy
>private practice where
>> we allocate 30 min. roughly per patient. I do use US on
>trigger points after
>> acupressure, and Likon on the sympathetic nervous
>system/psoas (especially
>> in chronic fatigue and fibromyalgia patients) to reduce its
>activity, but I
>> don't use any electro for any other reason unless the
>patient themselves
>> request it (and let's face it, I get old clients who come in
>and just want
>> to be mob'ed, US'ed and IFT'ed... and that is their choice!!).
>>
>> I found an interesting article the other day in the Pain
>journal on the
>> effectiveness of ultrasound therapy on musculoskeletal pain
>(Pain 81, 1999
>> 257-271). It basically evaluated the use of US, and looked
>at the existing
>> research on the topic. They basically concluded that for lateral
>> epicondylitis, soft tissue shoulder disorders, deegn
>rheumatic disorders,
>> ankle distorsions and TMJ disorders, US showed no
>significant clinical
>> effect. Even when they combined US with exercise therapy, there was
>> clinically important or statistically significant
>differences in favour of
>> US (which I was surprised to read, as we always thought that US was
>> effective only when it is used as an adjunct!!). Even though
>this does not
>> totally rule out the uselessness of US therapy, it
>definitely has some
>> strong gound to stand on!
>>
>> On the contrary, I found in the Am J of Physical Medicine
>and Rehab(79, 1,
>> p48-52, 2000) an article that looked at the use of US, dry
>needle, and
>> stretches of myofascial trigger points in the Upper Trap
>muscles. They found
>> that US combined with stretches and dry needle combined with
>stretches
>> produced significant results compared to simply stretching
>alone. However,
>> there was no difference between dry needle and the use of US
>in combination
>> with stretches.
>>
>> I find it interesting that even though Mr Cheng has noted a
>few articles
>> that claim to have clinical evidence of electrotherapy, most of the
>> literature out there disproves the effectiveness of
>electrotherapy, and
>> these should not be ignored. However, this issue will still
>continue to be
>> contraversial, the research will go on, and physiotherapists
>will form their
>> own opinions of what electro to use. Despite this, I support Bruce's
>> statement that time and cost is a big factor in this, and
>should not be
>> ignored. Unless we are in the field of sport physio and see
>athletes 3x a
>> day, 5x a week, I don't see the point of 15min/2x/week - how
>much difference
>> is it going to make because that is less than 1% of their
>week's time!!
>> Emphasis in this case should be on teaching the patients
>ultimately how to
>> look after themselves thus preventing future injury. Most
>people want to get
>> better, but also want to know how to keep themselves better, and
>> electrotherapy does not do this.
>>
>> Going through an undergraduate degree whereby electrotherapy
>was focused so
>> much and yet despised by most students(including myself), I
>am not for or
>> against electrotherapy. However, I believe (and this is only
>my opinion)
>> that unless there is more research for the efficacy of
>electrotherapy, not
>> too many future physiotherapists will include it in their
>treatment regime.
>>
>> Henry***
>>
>> >From: "Goh Ah Cheng" <[log in to unmask]>
>> >Reply-To: "Goh Ah Cheng" <[log in to unmask]>
>> >To: <[log in to unmask]>, <[log in to unmask]>
>> >Subject: Fw: EPA and evidence based practice
>> >Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2000 18:18:00 +0900
>> >
>> >Dear Fellow EPA and PHYSIO Mail-list members,
>> >
>> >Below is the reply from Bruce. He has chosen to reply to
>me directly
>> >instead of the list, so I am doing him a favour by
>forwarding it to the
>> >both
>> >lists (It must have been an oversight on his part.... perhaps due to
>> >another
>> >hard day at work).
>> >You may want to know that I, Panos and the entire academic
>community have
>> >been dismissed by Bruce as unworthy of providing evidence
>for EPA (or any
>> >subject for that matter) because WE LEFT THE CLINIC. I am
>not even going
>> >to
>> >respond to this.....
>> >Secondly, the scientific method has also been denounced as being
>> >inappropriate for any discussion on evidence based practice
>(I assume not
>> >only for EPA, but for our entire base of knowledge!!). Am
>I missing out on
>> >something here??
>> >Thirdly, EPA can be dismissed by all of us from this day
>henceforth because
>> >it has been around for the past 50 years and the world was
>not impressed!!
>> >I must have missed out when everyone was out there casting
>their votes.
>> >Fourthly, God is dead.
>> >And finally, any discussion that goes contrary to Bruce's
>point of view is
>> >immature, incurs opportunity costs and is a waste of
>taxpayers dollars.
>> >That is the FINAL WORD, according to Bruce, Chapter 4,
>Verse Sick (I mean,
>> >Six).
>> >Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go look for another God.
>> >Completey Devastated,
>> >Cheng
>> >
>> >----- Original Message -----
>> >From: Bruce Gray <[log in to unmask]>
>> >To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> >Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2000 5:46 PM
>> >Subject: Re: EPA and evidence based practice
>> >
>> >
>> > > Hi Gohac
>> > >
>> > > On this website, I have found the greatest support for
>electrotherapy
>> >comes from academics. I have no idea how much clinical
>experience they draw
>> >on, or why they left the clinic.
>> > > These critics, esp yourself and Panos, seem to make a
>lot of time to
>> >reply
>> >with verbose highbrow sarcasm, using one or two papers here
>and there to
>> >give your point invincible Truth status.
>> > > As anyone who has read knows, the scientific method does
>not deal in
>> >deduced ultimate truths, instead it induces enough evidence
>for a consensus
>> >to be reached by field peers.
>> > >
>> > > That electrotherapy has been around for 50 years and not
>wowed the world
>> >with its superior healing powers let alone drawn together
>scientific peer
>> >consensus is enough for me to burst the bubble on its
>overinflated cult
>> >following.
>> > >
>> > > Let's face it guys, your God is dead.
>> > >
>> > > And please show some maturity by recognising the
>opportunity costs of
>> >continuing this argument. Anything I wanted to say has been
>said. And I
>> >assume the same for yourselves. Let it rest at that, and
>get on with doing
>> >something more productive with tax payers' dollars.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>_______________________________________________________________________
>> > >
>> > > Free Unlimited Internet Access! Try it now!
>> > > http://www.zdnet.com/downloads/altavista/index.html
>> > >
>> > >
>_______________________________________________________________________
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>_______________________________________________________________
>__________
>> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
>http://www.hotmail.com.
>>
>> Share information about yourself,
>create your own public profile at
>> http://profiles.msn.com.
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|