The first IfT machine was designed in Austria by Dr Nemec in the late 1940’s. This Nemectrodyn was limited in frequency selection, electrode placement, output, and treatment range.

IfT first came to Britain in 1949 and continued in popularity for the next 40 years or so, but problems with electrode placement, frequency selection, and the expansion of manual therapy techniques meant it fell from favour from all but the most ardent fans within the profession.

Next came a Dutch machine with a wider range of frequencies and without the need to calibrate the machine via its internal oscilloscope every time you wanted to use it!

In the late 1970s the first British machine was designed and developed by the Medical Electronics Department at St Bartholomew’s Hospital, London and this revolutionized the way we could treat patients as well as opening up a whole new range of conditions that we could help. This generation of equipment was also notable in that the engineers actually worked with clinical physiotherapists in order to produce a machine with the “end user” in mind! This is when I first really became involved with IfT and began to realise its full potential.

What has been almost entirely overlooked is that during all these decades IfT was seldom used for pain relief, whereas IfT today has now been reduced to an expensive TENS machine.

When Physiotherapy became an all-graduate entry profession in the mid 1980’s, additional areas of study were required by the BSc course, which meant that a large section of what was once “core knowledge” has all but been removed from the curriculum. Most of the electrotherapy content has now been removed and with it our ability to actively treat a wide range of conditions.

Manual therapy, rehabilitation and exercise therapy have now become the main areas of activity and the actual value and place of Physiotherapy within the healthcare professions has changed dramatically as a result.

A good deal of the old electrotherapy syllabus has, quite rightly, been consigned to the museum through lack of evidence and even clinical effectiveness. However, there are still some anomalies. I fail to understand why pulsed shortwave therapy is still being taught and used and yet IfT, ultrasound and lasers have all but fallen by the wayside.

IfT is viewed as an electro-analgaesic or a muscle stimulator. I have worked with IfT for over 40 years and seen the results first hand.  I have been collating just some of the research that was carried out in the relatively early years and the 1980s in particular.

My major concern is that a valuable treatment system will be lost to our profession and our patients.