Pain and Functional Scores in Patients Affected by Knee OA after Treatment with Pulsed Electromagnetic and Magnetic Fields: A Meta-Analysis

A prospective, randomised, controlled, double blinded, cross-over study on the effect of a single session of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy on signs of hip osteoarthritis in dogs

BACKGROUND

Canine coxofemoral joint osteoarthritis is a common, painful and debilitating condition. The objective of this study was to evaluate if any measurable changes in pain or lameness occurred in this patient group immediately after a single treatment with pulsed electromagnetic field therapy. Eight dogs with coxofemoral joint osteoarthritis presenting with signs of pain and lameness were prospectively recruited to this randomised, controlled, double blinded, cross-over study. Subjects attended the research facility on two occasions for one active and one placebo treatment with pulsed electromagnetic field therapy. The immediate effect of one pulsed electromagnetic field therapy treatment on pain and lameness was measured subjectively with the Helsinki Chronic Pain Index and Visual Analogue Scale and objectively using a pressure sensitive walkway.

RESULTS

A statistically significant difference (P = 0.03) for change in stride length in the affected limb was recorded for subjects between the active and placebo treatments with pulsed electromagnetic field therapy. Within the active treatment results, there was a statistically significant change in the measurement for reach (P = 0.04) and stride length (P = 0.047) which got shorter in the affected limb post treatment. For the subjective outcome measures, there was no statistically significant difference between the active and placebo treatments for the evening of the treatment day or the next morning from pre-treatment values. Within the placebo treatment results a statistically significant change (improvement) was detected in Visual Analogue Score (P = 0.03) between pre-treatment and the next morning values.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study do not show demonstrable improvement in owner assessed pain levels or temporospatial performance in dogs with coxofemoral joint osteoarthritis immediately after a single application of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy.

Energizing Healing with Electromagnetic Field Therapy in Musculoskeletal Disorders

There is mounting evidence to suggest that exogenous electromagnetic fields (EMF) may play a significant role in various biological processes that are crucial to therapeutic interventions. EMFs have been identified as a non-invasive, safe, and effective therapy that appears to have no apparent side effects. Numerous studies have demonstrated that pulsed EMFs (PEMFs) have the potential to become a stand-alone or adjunctive treatment modality for managing musculoskeletal disorders. However, several questions remain unresolved. Before their widespread clinical application, further research from well-designed, high-quality studies is required to standardize treatment parameters and determine the optimal protocol for healthcare decision-making. This article provides a comprehensive overview of the impact of musculoskeletal diseases on overall well-being, the limitations of conventional treatments, and the need to explore alternative therapeutic modalities such as electromagnetic field (EMF) therapy. EMF therapy uses low-frequency electromagnetic waves to stimulate tissue repair, reduce inflammation, and modulate pain signals, making it a safe and convenient alternative to conventional treatments. The article also discusses the historical perspective of EMF therapy in medicine. The article highlights the potential of EMF therapy as a personalized and comprehensive care option for musculoskeletal diseases, either alone or in conjunction with other therapies. It emphasizes the imperative for further research in this field and presents a compelling case for the use of EMF therapy in managing musculoskeletal diseases. Overall, the available findings on the underlying cellular and molecular biology support the use of EMF therapy as a viable option for the management of musculoskeletal disorders and stresses the need for continued research in this area.

Efficacy and safety of sodium hyaluronate combined with celecoxib for knee osteoarthritis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Due to the large cost of joint replacement for surgical treatment of knee osteoarthritis, there are many complications in elderly patients, and there are many contraindications to surgery, and conservative treatment is still based on drugs. To further evaluate the efficacy and safety of sodium hyaluronate combined with celecoxib for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee. In total, 202 studies were screened, with a final selection of 9 RCTs involving 2339 participants; of these, 9 RCTs were included in the final meta-analysis. Treatment group reduces VAS (SMD = -1.61; 95 % CI [-2.25, -0.98]; I2 = 95 %; P < 0.00001) and adverse reactions (OR = 0.45; 95 % CI [0.22,0.94]; I2 = 0 %; P < 0.33); Meanwhile, improving Lysholm knee scores (SMD = 0.19; 95 % CI [-0.06, -0.44]; I2 = 76 %; P = 0.0004) and Clinical efficiency (OR = 0.31; 95 % CI [0.19,0.50]; I2 = 0 %; P < 0.00001). All indicators were superior to the control group. Our primary findings suggest that KOA treatment with celecoxib combined with sodium hyaluronate reduces VAS, while improving Lysholm scores and Clinical efficiency. In addition, we found that celecoxib combined with sodium hyaluronate treatment had fewer adverse effects than the control group, indicating that the combination is safe and effective in the treatment of KOA.

Effects of the combination of pulsed electromagnetic field with progressive resistance exercise on knee osteoarthritis: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a common and disabling disease among the elderly population. The optimal conservative treatment for knee OA is not well established.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) combined with progressive resistance exercise (PRE) in improving physical function and pain in patients with knee OA.

METHODS

Thirty-four patients with knee OA (17 in each group) participated in a single-blind randomized control study. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 24 sessions of either combined PEMF and PRE (treatment group) or PRE only (control group). Patients were evaluated at pre-treatment, post-treatment (2 months), and at 3-month and 6-month follow-ups using the Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS), Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS); walking speed and 5-times chair stand test. Mixed ANOVA was used for statistical analysis with Bonferroni adjustments.

RESULTS

There was no significant group-by-time interaction for any outcome (P> 0.05). However, both groups scored significantly higher on the NPRS and KOOS at post-treatment, 3-, and 6-month follow-up compared to their baseline. Further, both groups completed the 5-times chair stand test and walking speed test with significantly less time at all post-treatment time points than the pre-treatment. None of the study outcomes (NPRS, KOOS, walking speed, and 5 times chair stand) were significantly different between groups at any of the time points.

CONCLUSION

Both treatment options, PRE only versus PRE with PEMF, were equally effective in decreasing pain and improving physical function in patients with knee OA. This would suggest that the optimal parameters for PEMF that may show beneficial effects for knee OA when added to PRE training need to be determined.

Laser therapy versus pulsed electromagnetic field therapy as treatment modalities for early knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This randomized controlled trial aimed to compare the effects of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy (PEMFT) and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) on pain and physical function of participants with knee osteoarthritis (KOA).

METHODS

According to the Kellgren-Lawrence classification, participants with grade 2-3 KOA were randomized to receive PEMFT or LLLT for six sessions lasting 15 min/session over a 3-week period. Pain at rest and when walking, standing from a sitting position, and climbing the stairs was assessed using the visual analog scale. Functional level was measured by the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), timed up-and-go test (TUG), and 10-m walk (10 MW) test. Measurements were obtained before and after the interventions. Significance was determined at p ≤ 0.05.

RESULTS

Forty participants were included in the study. Pain and physical function improved significantly (p < 0.0001) in both groups. PEMFT was significantly more effective in reducing pain at rest, when standing from a sitting position, and when climbing the stairs, and in improving both WOMAC scores and TUG results (p ≤ 0.0003). The improvements in pain during the activities and the WOMAC scores reached the minimal clinically important difference. No adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

Six sessions of PEMFT and LLLT had immediate positive effects on pain and physical function in individuals with low-grade KOA, with PEMFT resulting in significantly better results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN registry trial ID: ISRCTN17001174.

Pulsed electromagnetic fields improve pain management and clinical outcomes after medial unicompartmental knee arthroplasty: A prospective randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

To assess pain relief and clinical outcomes in patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty (UKA) stimulated with pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs) compared to a control group.

METHODS

A prospective randomised controlled trial (RCT) was performed in which 72 patients undergoing medial UKA were randomised into a control group or an experimental PEMFs group. The patients allocated to the experimental group were instructed to use PEMFs for 4 h per day for 60 days. They were evaluated before a surgery and then during the time points corresponding to 1 month, 2 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 36 months after the surgery. No placebo group was included in the RCT. Clinical assessment included the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) for pain, Oxford Knee Score (OKS), the Short Form 36 (SF-36) health survey questionnaire, and joint swelling. During each follow-up visit, the consumption of Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs (NSAIDs) was recorded.

RESULTS

The VAS decreased on follow-up visits in both the groups; a statistically significant difference between the groups was observed during the 6 (p = 0.0297), 12 (p = 0.0003), and 36 months (p = 0.0333) follow-ups in favour of the PEMFs group. One month after UKA, the percentages of patients using NSAIDs in the PEMFs and control group were 71% and 92%, respectively (p = 0.0320). At the 2 months point, 15% of the patients in the PEMFs group used NSAIDs compared to 39% in the control group (p = 0.0317). The objective knee girth evaluation showed a statistically significant difference at 6 (p = 0.0204), 12 (p = 0.0005), and 36 (p = 0.0005) months with improved values observed in the PEMFs group. The subjective assessment of the swelling demonstrated a statistically significant difference at 2 (p = 0.0073), 6 (p = 0.0006), 12 (p = 0.0001), and 36 (p = 0.0011) months with better values noted in the PEMFs group. Last, the OKS result was significant higher in the experimental group during all the follow-ups (1mth: p = 0.0295; 2mths: p = 0.0012; 6mths: p = 0.0001; 12mths: p < 0.0001; 36mths: p = 0.0061).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of PEMFs leads to significant pain relief, better clinical improvement, and lower NSAIDs consumption after medial UKA when compared to the control group.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

The Efficacy of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields on Pain, Stiffness, and Physical Function in Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Although there are many pharmacological interventions for adults with osteoarthritis (OA) who do not meet the indications for surgery, side effects and adverse effects cannot be ignored. Physical interventions are known for their effectiveness and safety, and pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs) have already been applied to skeletal diseases such as osteoporosis.

Objective

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to assess the efficacy of PEMF on the major symptoms of patients with OA compared with efficacy of other interventions.

Methods

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating OA patients treated with PEMF and with pain, stiffness, and physical function impairment since 2009 were included. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Western Ontario McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores were used for assessment. All extracted data were analyzed using RevMan V.5.3.

Results

Eleven RCTs consisting of 614 patients were enrolled in this meta-analysis, of which 10 trials comprised knee OA and one comprised hand OA. Compared with the control groups, the PEMF treatment yielded a more favorable output. PEMF alleviated pain (standardized mean differences [SMD] = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.08-1.34, p = 0.03), improved stiffness (SMD = 1.34, 95% CI: 0.45-2.23,p=0.003), and restored physical function (SMD = 1.52, 95% CI: 0.49-2.55,p=0.004).

Conclusions

PEMF therapy ameliorates OA symptoms such as pain, stiffness, and physical function in patients compared to other conservative treatments. There is an urgent need to search for different types of OA in multiple locations.

Effects of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy on outcomes associated with osteoarthritis : A systematic review of systematic reviews

Background

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a chronic degenerative disease of multiple joints with a rising prevalence. Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy may provide a cost-effective, noninvasive, and safe therapeutic modality with growing popularity and use in physical medicine and rehabilitation. The purpose of this study was to synthesize the current knowledge on the use of PEMF in OA.

Methods

A systematic review of systematic reviews was performed. The PubMed, Embase, PEDro and Web of Science databases were searched based on a predetermined protocol.

Results

Overall, 69 studies were identified. After removing the duplicates and then screening title, abstract and full text, 10 studies were included in the final analysis. All studies focused on knee OA, and four studies also reported on cervical, two on hand, and one on ankle OA. In terms of the level of evidence and bias, most studies were of low or medium quality. Most concurrence was observed for pain reduction, with other endpoints such as stiffness or physical function showing a greater variability in outcomes.

Conclusion

The PEMF therapy appears to be effective in the short term to relieve pain and improve function in patients with OA. The existing studies used very heterogeneous treatment schemes, mostly with low sample sizes and suboptimal study designs, from which no sufficient proof of efficacy can be derived. A catalogue of measures to improve the quality of future studies has been drawn up.

Biophysical Stimulation in Athletes' Joint Degeneration: A Narrative Review

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most prevalent degenerative joint disease and the main cause of pain and disability in elderly people. OA currently represents a significant social health problem, since it affects 250 million individuals worldwide, mainly adults aged over 65. Although OA is a multifactorial disease, depending on both genetic and environmental factors, it is reported that joint degeneration has a higher prevalence in former athletes. Repetitive impact and loading, joint overuse and recurrent injuries followed by a rapid return to the sport might explain athletes' predisposition to joint articular degeneration. In recent years, however, big efforts have been made to improve the prevention and management of sports injuries and to speed up the athletes' return-to-sport. Biophysics is the study of biological processes and systems using physics-based methods or based on physical principles. Clinical biophysics has recently evolved as a medical branch that investigates the relationship between the human body and non-ionizing physical energy. A physical stimulus triggers a biological response by regulating specific intracellular pathways, thus acting as a drug. Preclinical and clinical trials have shown positive effects of biophysical stimulation on articular cartilage, subchondral bone and synovia. This review aims to assess the role of pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs) and extracorporeal shockwave therapy (ESWT) in the prevention and treatment of joint degeneration in athletes.

[Efficacy and safety of magnet therapy using portable device for knee osteoarthritis. 55-week double-blind study results]

Instrumental physiotherapeutic treatment using portable devices is optimal for patients with rheumatic diseases due to the devices' greater accessibility. However, there are still issues concerning the efficacy of physical factors generated by portable equipment in osteoarthritis (OA), mostly due to the limited evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy and safety of long-term use of the portable magnet therapy device ALMAG+ (Almag Active) in knee OA (KOA).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, prospective, 55-week clinical trial of the medical device was conducted. The study included patients with primary and secondary (associated with immunoinflammatory rheumatic diseases) KOA stages I-III according to Kellgren-Lawrence diagnosed using generally accepted criteria (R. Altman et al., 1986). Enrollment of patients with secondary KOA was allowed given that the remission or low disease activity was achieved. During the study patients had to receive steady drug therapy. No intra-articular injections of glucocorticosteroids, hyaluronic acid, PRP, and physiotherapy procedures for knees (electrotherapy, shockwave therapy, heat therapy, hydrotherapy, peloid therapy) were allowed three months or less before the enrollment and throughout the study. According to the approved protocol, 77 patients (mean age 52.73±12.97 years) from two research centers participated in the study: 32 (41.6%) were males, and 45 (58.4%) were females. Primary KOA occurred in 41 (52%) patients, 36 (46.8%) patients had secondary KOA (associated with rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, Sjögren's disease, psoriatic arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, or diffuse scleroderma). All patients received NSAIDs as a concomitant therapy, 24.7% received diacerein, 28.6% received disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, 2.6% received methylprednisolone up to 8 mg/day, and 9% received biologic therapy. After randomization, 40 (52%) patients received placebo treatments (Group 1) and 37 (48%) received active treatments (Group 2). Both groups were comparable in the main parameters. The proportion of smokers was higher in Group 2, but the difference was not statistically significant. During the 55-week follow-up, three courses of 18 daily home magnet therapy procedures each were performed.

RESULTS

In both groups, starting from week 5 of the study, an improvement of pain on movement and at rest according to VAS compared to the baseline (p<0.01 at all assessment time points) was observed, which can be explained by a pronounced placebo effect, often observed in OA. The improvement of pain at rest was more prominent in Group 2 vs. Group 1 at Week 21 (p=0.038) and Week 55 (p=0.017) of the study, probably due to the anti-inflammatory effect. The overall WOMAC index score was also lower in Group 2 vs. Group 1 at Weeks 21 and 55 (p=0.03 at both time points). The mean articular cartilage thickness, determined by ultrasound, reduced in Group 1 and remained practically unchanged in Group 2 (p=0.011). No adverse events associated with the use of the ALMAG+ (Almag Active) device, according to the attending physician, and no exacerbations of immunoinflammatory rheumatic diseases during the study period were reported.

CONCLUSION

The results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of magnet therapy using a portable device demonstrated analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and structure-modifying effects of this type of physiotherapeutic treatment. No adverse events and exacerbations of rheumatic diseases associated with the study treatment have been reported.

Promising application of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields (PEMFs) in musculoskeletal disorders

Increasing evidence suggests that an exogenous electromagnetic field might be involved in many biologic processes which are of great importance for therapeutic interventions. Pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs) are known to be a noninvasive, safe and effective therapy agent without apparent side effects. Numerous studies have shown that PEMFs possess the potential to become a stand-alone or adjunctive treatment modality for treating musculoskeletal disorders. However, several issues remain unresolved. Prior to their widely clinical application, further researches from well-designed, high-quality studies are still required to standardize the treatment parameters and derive the optimal protocol for health-care decision making. In this review, we aim to provide current evidence on the mechanism of action, clinical applications, and controversies of PEMFs in musculoskeletal disorders.