Static magnetic field therapy for symptomatic diabetic neuropathy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Weintraub, Michael; Wolfe, Gil I.; Barohn, Richard; Cole, Steven P.; Parry, Gareth; Hayat, Ghazala; Cohen, Jeffrey A.; Page, Jeffrey C.; Bromberg, Mark B.; Schwartz, Sherwyn

doi:10.1016/s0003-9993(03)00106-0

Cited by 179 publications

(126 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

122

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the articles comparing electromagnetic field use versus placebo group, one showed no significant improvement in pain relief [-0.69 (95% CI: -1.86 to 0.48; I2: 63%, p=0.25)] ( Figure 2B) [18][19][20][21] .…”

Section: Electromagnetic Field Versus Placebomentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Low-frequency TENS activates mu opioid receptors, and highfrequency TENS activates delta opioid receptors 33 . However, the effects of electromagnetic stimulation result from interruptions in the direct or indirect activation of afferent signals from fiber type C to the distal part of the axon, which produces an antinociceptive effect 20 .…”

Section: Summary Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eight studies properly described the generation of a random sequence 13,14,18,19,20,22,23 . No study clearly described allocation concealment.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitations Of The Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As several studies have suggested, nonpharmacological options, such as electrical stimulation, which represents one of the more benign therapies for this condition 9 , may contribute to a better quality of life and fewer complaints of pain 10 . In randomized trials, various types of electrotherapy, such as transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS) [11][12][13][14][15] , pulsed electromagnetic fields [16][17][18][19] , static magnetic field therapy 20 , low-frequency pulsed magnetic field 21 , high-frequency external muscle stimulation (HF) 22 , frequency-modulated electromagnetic neural stimulation (FREMS) 23 and percutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (PENS) 24 , have been reported to show beneficial effects, such as decreased pain and improved sensitivity, due to electric stimulation in the treatment of patients with PDN.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, studies comparing these benefits with those obtained from placebo had small sample sizes and showed conflicting results [11][12][13][14][15][18][19][20][21][22][23][24] . A systematic review of the evidence would allow for a more precise evaluation of its effectiveness and, if the benefits are proven, aid in disseminating the use of electrical stimulation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Electrical stimulation and electromagnetic field use in patients with diabetic neuropathy: systematic review and meta-analysis

Stein¹,

Eibel²,

Sbruzzi³

et al. 2013

Braz. J. Phys. Ther.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

| Background: Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) is a common complication of diabetes mellitus, and pharmacological therapies are ineffective in many patients. Therefore, other treatment modalities should be considered, including electrical stimulation and electromagnetic fields. Objectives: The research objective was to evaluate the effect of treatment with electrical stimulation and electromagnetic fields on pain and sensitivity in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy compared with placebo or another intervention. Method: We searched the following electronic databases (from inception to April 2012): MEDLINE (accessed by PubMed), LILACS, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL. We included randomized trials that compared electrical stimulation or electromagnetic fields with control groups in which the objective was to assess pain and sensitivity in patients with PDN. Two reviewers independently extracted the data. A random-effects model was used for the main analysis. Results: The search retrieved 1336 articles, of which 12 studies were included. Reductions in the mean pain score were significantly greater in the TENS (transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation) group than in the placebo group [-0.44 (95% CI: -0.79 to -0.09; I2: 0%)]. There was no improvement in pain relief when electromagnetic fields were compared with the control group [-0.69 (95% CI: -1.86 to 0.48; I2: 63%)]. Conclusions: We found that TENS improved pain relief in patients with diabetic neuropathy, while no such improvement was observed with the use of electromagnetic field treatment. Due to the methodological differences between the studies, a meta-analysis for the outcome of sensitivity could not be performed.Keywords: physical therapy; diabetic neuropathies; electrical stimulation; electromagnetic fields; pain; review. HOW TO CITE THIS ARTICLE

show abstract

Section: Electromagnetic Field Versus Placebomentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Summary Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eight studies properly described the generation of a random sequence 13,14,18,19,20,22,23 . No study clearly described allocation concealment.…”

Section: Strengths and Limitations Of The Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%