Effectiveness of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields on Bone Healing: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Lihong Peng; Chenying Fu; Feng Xiong; Qing Zhang; Zejun Liang; Li Chen; Chengqi He; Quan Wei

doi:10.1002/bem.22271

journal article Jun 03, 2020

Effectiveness of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields on Bone Healing: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Lihong Peng

Chenying Fu Feng Xiong

Quan Wei

Bioelectromagnetics Vol. 41 No. 5 pp. 323-337 · Wiley

View at Publisher Save 10.1002/bem.22271

Abstract

The effect of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) on bone healing is still uncertain and it has not been established as a standardized treatment. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis is to evaluate the effect of PEMF on bone healing in patients with fracture. We searched CNKI, Wan Fang, VIP, EMbase, PubMed, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and Open Grey websites for randomized controlled trials (published before July 2019 in English or Chinese) comparing any form of PEMF to sham. Reference lists were also searched. Related data were extracted by two investigators independently. The bias risk of the articles and the evidence strength of the outcomes were evaluated. Twenty‐two studies were eligible and included in our analysis (n = 1,468 participants). The pooled results of 14 studies (n = 1,131 participants) demonstrated that healing rate in PEMF group was 79.7% (443/556), and that in the control group was 64.3% (370/575). PEMF increased healing rate (RR = 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10–1.35; I2 = 48%) by the Mantel–Haenszel analysis, relieved pain (standardized mean difference (SMD) = −0.49; 95% CI = −0.88 to −0.10; I2 = 60%) by the inverse variance analysis, and accelerated healing time (SMD = −1.01; 95% CI = −2.01 to −0.00; I2 = 90%) by the inverse variance analysis. Moderate quality evidence suggested that PEMF increased healing rate and relieved pain of fracture, and very low‐quality evidence showed that PEMF accelerated healing time. Larger and higher quality randomized controlled trials and pre‐clinical studies of optimal frequency, amplitude, and duration parameters are needed. © 2020 Bioelectromagnetics Society.

Topics

No keywords indexed for this article. Browse by subject →

References

57

[1]

10.1016/j.joms.2010.10.013

[2]

10.2106/jbjs.j.00869

[3]

10.1186/1749-799x-7-24

[4]

10.1016/s0140-6736(84)92329-8

[5]

10.2106/jbjs.k.01344

[6]

10.1006/bbrc.1998.9243

[7]

10.3928/01477447-20120621-20

[8]

Capanna R "Effect of electromagnetic fields on patients undergoing massive bone graft following bone tumor resection—A double blind study" Clin Orthop Relat Res (1994)

[9]

10.1080/16501970510041055

[10]

Elsisi HFEM "Electromagnetic field versus circuit weight training on bone mineral density in elderly women" Clin Interv Aging (2015)

[11]

10.1097/bco.0b013e3181d4880f

[12]

10.1016/j.spinee.2007.06.006

[13]

10.3928/0147-7447-19980301-12

[14]

Griffin XL "Electromagnetic field stimulation for treating delayed union or non‐union of long bone fractures in adults" Cochrane Database Syst Rev (2011)

[15]

10.1007/s00421-007-0520-x

[16]

10.4103/0019-5413.50850

[17]

Delayed union and nonunions: Epidemiology, clinical issues, and financial aspects

David J. Hak, Daniel Fitzpatrick, Julius A. Bishop et al.

Injury 10.1016/j.injury.2014.04.002

[18]

10.1186/1471-2474-12-90

[19]

10.1302/0301-620x.94b10.28844

[20]

10.1007/s00402-014-2014-8

[21]

10.1302/0301-620x.96b8.33767

[22]

10.1186/s12891-015-0541-2

[23]

Higgins JPT (2011)

[24]

10.1097/01.ta.0000060262.76267.ef

[25]

10.1002/jor.23460

[26]

10.4103/0019-5413.50846

[27]

10.2298/sarh1210619l

[28]

Li S "Pulse electromagnetic field for delayed union of open fracture" J Xinxiang Med Univer (2013)

[29]

10.1097/00007632-200207010-00002

[30]

10.1016/0141-5425(88)90153-7

[31]

Mammi GI "The electrical stimulation of tibial osteotomies" Clin Orthop Relat Res (1993)

[32]

10.25100/cm.v45i2.1479

[33]

10.1186/s12913-014-0579-0

[34]

10.1016/j.jormas.2019.02.022

[35]

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement

David Moher, Alessandro Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff et al.

International Journal of Surgery 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007

[36]

10.2106/jbjs.h.00111

[37]

10.1097/00002517-199912050-00005

[38]

10.5435/00124635-200309000-00007

[39]

Qian YY "The effect of nursing care and pulsed electromagnetic field interventions on the promotion of healing of distal radius fracture and reduction of osteoporosis among elderly patients" Mod Prev Med (2014)

[40]

Qu CD "Pulsed electromagnetic field in the treatment of 32 cases of fresh lower extremity fracture" Chin J Phys Ther (2000)

[41]

10.2106/00004623-199406000-00005

[42]

10.1002/(sici)1097-4652(199809)176:3<537::aid-jcp10>3.0.co;2-x

[43]

10.1302/0301-620x.72b3.2187877

[44]

10.1186/1471-2474-14-35

[45]

10.1016/s0020-1383(02)00209-7

[46]

10.1177/1071100716652621

[47]

10.1016/j.injury.2010.11.048

[48]

Wang JJ "Clinical observation of pulsed electromagnetic field in treating swelling pain and bone healing after fracture" Home Med (2016)

[49]

Wang ZR "Effect of pulsed electromagnetic field on limbs fracture" Flight Surg (2005)

[50]

10.1097/bot.0000000000000488

Showing 50 of 57 references

Cited By

42

Stimuli‐Responsive Materials for Biomedical Applications

Adriana Teixeira do Nascimento, Paul R. Stoddart · 2025

Advanced Materials

Promising application of pulsed electromagnetic fields on tissue repair and regeneration

Dan-bo Su, Zi-xu Zhao · 2024

Progress in Biophysics and Molecula...

Metrics

42

Citations

57

References

Details

Published: Jun 03, 2020
Vol/Issue: 41(5)
Pages: 323-337
License: View

Authors

L

Lihong Peng