Kull Philipp, Keilani Mohammad, Remer Franziska, Crevenna Richard
Department of Physical Medicine, Rehabilitation and Occupational Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Department of Physical Medicine, Rehabilitation and Occupational Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Waehringer Guertel 18-20, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
Wien Med Wochenschr. 2025 Feb;175(1-2):11-19. doi: 10.1007/s10354-023-01025-5. Epub 2023 Nov 24.
INTRODUCTION: Non-specific low back pain is a common and clinically significant condition with substantial socioeconomic implications. Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy has shown benefits in pain reduction and improvement of physical function in patients with pain-associated disorders like osteoarthritis. However, studies had heterogeneous settings. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of PEMF on pain and function on patients with non-specific low back pain. METHODS: A systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and PEDro was performed (from inception until 15/5/2023). Outcome measures assessed pain and function. RESULTS: Nine randomized controlled trials with 420 participants (n = 420) were included. The studies compared PEMF vs. placebo-PEMF, PEMF and conventional physical therapy vs. conventional physical therapy alone, PEMF and conventional physical therapy vs. placebo-PEMF and conventional physical therapy, PEMF vs. high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) vs. conventional physical therapy, and osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) and PEMF vs. PEMF alone vs. placebo-PEMF vs. OMT alone. Five of the nine included studies showed statistically significant pain reduction and improvement in physical function in comparison to their control groups (p < 0.05). There was substantial heterogeneity among the groups of the study, with a wide range of duration (10-30 min), treatments per week (2-7/week), applied frequencies (3-50 Hz), and intensities (2mT-150mT). No serious adverse event had been reported in any study. The included studies showed solid methodological quality, with an overall score of 7.2 points according to the PEDro scale. CONCLUSION: PEMF therapy seems to be a safe and beneficial treatment option for non-specific low back pain, particularly if used as an addition to conventional physical therapy modalities. Future research should focus on standardized settings including assessment methods, treatment regimens, frequencies, and intensities.
引言：非特异性腰痛是一种常见且具有临床意义的病症，具有重大的社会经济影响。脉冲电磁场（PEMF）疗法已显示出对骨关节炎等疼痛相关疾病患者在减轻疼痛和改善身体功能方面的益处。然而，各项研究的设置存在异质性。本研究的目的是评估PEMF对非特异性腰痛患者疼痛和功能的影响。 方法：在PubMed、MEDLINE、EMBASE、Cochrane图书馆和PEDro中对随机对照试验进行了系统的文献检索（从创刊至2023年5月15日）。结局指标评估疼痛和功能。 结果：纳入了9项随机对照试验，共420名参与者（n = 420）。这些研究比较了PEMF与安慰剂 - PEMF、PEMF与传统物理治疗与单独的传统物理治疗、PEMF与传统物理治疗与安慰剂 - PEMF和传统物理治疗、PEMF与高强度激光治疗（HILT）与传统物理治疗，以及整骨手法治疗（OMT）与PEMF与单独的PEMF与安慰剂 - PEMF与单独的OMT。9项纳入研究中的5项显示，与各自的对照组相比，疼痛有统计学意义的减轻且身体功能得到改善（p < 0.05）。研究组之间存在很大的异质性，持续时间范围广泛（10 - 30分钟）、每周治疗次数（2 - 7次/周）、应用频率（3 - 50赫兹）和强度（2mT - 150mT）。任何研究均未报告严重不良事件。纳入的研究显示出扎实的方法学质量，根据PEDro量表的总体评分为7.2分。 结论：PEMF疗法似乎是治疗非特异性腰痛的一种安全且有益的选择，特别是作为传统物理治疗方式的补充使用时。未来的研究应专注于标准化设置，包括评估方法、治疗方案、频率和强度。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-6-10
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-11-18
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-4-24
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-1-14
Health Technol Assess. 2024-10
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-1-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-10-21
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-12-22
Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg. 2021-5
Zotero 插件