OBJECTIVES: : In this study, we aimed to compare morphological and histological differences between magnetic field and electric stimulation therapies in an experimental burn injury model in rats. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between February 2011 and July 2011, a total of 21 Sprague-Dawley female rats were used in this study. Second-degree burns were induced on the back areas of the rats. All rats were equally divided into three groups including seven in each: the first burn group was treated with antibacterial pomade (Group 1, control group); the second group was treated with both antibacterial pomade and pulsed electromagnetic field therapy (Group 2); and the third group was treated with antibacterial pomade and electric stimulation for 14 days (Group 3). RESULTS: Earlier re-epithelialization, wound area contraction, reduction of edema, and hyperaemia were observed on gross examination in the pulsed electromagnetic fields and electric stimulation therapy groups compared to the control group. Neovascularization, collagen density, granulation tissue formation, cell proliferation, and inflammatory cell response of the pulsed electromagnetic fields and electric stimulation group increased, compared to the control group, in the histopathological evaluation (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study results showed the positive healing effects of electric stimulation and pulsed electromagnetic fields on burn injury. Pulsed electromagnetic fields therapy produced more positive signs of healing than the electric stimulation group.