Study of Electromagnetic Field (EMF) on the Human Muscle Activity: A Preliminary Study

Mansor, Mohd Shuhaibul Fadly; Abas, Wan Abu Bakar Wan; Mahadi, Wan Nor Liza Binti Wan

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-69139-6_66

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many authors [9,10,19,20] have indicated the need for searching for new, more effective methods that can reduce the occurrence of urinary incontinence symptoms. Among the electrotherapeutic methods, laser stimulation [21,22] and magnetic stimulation therapy [11,[23][24][25][26][27][28] have been mentioned. The trend until now in the treatment of urinary incontinence has been to use a magnetic field with a frequency of 0.5 to 50 Hz and a magnetic induction intensity of 0.1 to 20 millitesla (mT) [24,25,28].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the Short-Term Effects after High-Inductive Electromagnetic Stimulation of Pelvic Floor Muscles: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Study

Ptaszkowski

Małkiewicz

Zdrojowy

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Physiotherapy should be performed by patients with stress or mixed urinary incontinence (SUI and MUI) to increase the strength and endurance of the pelvic floor muscles (PFMs). A method that can positively affect the pelvic floor is stimulation with high-inductive electromagnetic stimulation (HIES). The aim of the study was to evaluate the PFMs after the application of HIES in women with SUI and MUI by using surface electromyography (sEMG). Methods: This was a prospective, randomized, single-blind study with a sham intervention group. The participants were randomly assigned to the HIES group or sham group. The outcomes were features of the bioelectrical PFM activity assessed using sEMG and endovaginal probes. A single-session intervention in the HIES group included 20 min of HIES with an electromagnetic induction intensity of 2.5 T. Results: In the HIES group, there was a statistically significant difference in the PFM sEMG activity during “contractions” (p < 0.001) and “quick flicks” (p = 0.005). In the intergroup comparison, higher PFM sEMG activity after the intervention (“contraction”) was observed in the HIES group than in the sham group (after: p = 0.047; 1 h after: p = 0.017). Conclusions: The assessed HIES method seems effective for SUI and MUI patients in the short term and shows an advantage over the sham intervention in the assessment of PFM contractions.

show abstract