PEMF Scientific Studies Pulsed ElectroMagnetic Therapy
This is a concise list of PEMF studies. However, there are over 2,000 studies done with this technology, many of which were double blind, placebo case studies and all of them show a greater percentage of benefits versus the control group.
Rotator Cuff Injuries
Title: PHYSICAL THERAPY MANAGEMENT OF THE SHOULDER
Author(s): NITZ AJ
Source: PHYSICAL THERAPY Volume: 66 Issue: 12 Pages: 1912-1919 Published: DEC 1986
Experimental Procedure for Tissue Healing
An experimental treatment modality, pulsed electromagnetic field ( PEMF ) therapy, has been used recently for patients with chronic rotator cuff tendinitis who do not respond to steroid injection or other forms of conventional conservative management (nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents and analgesics). 104 Seventy percent of the patients with recalcitrant rotator cuff tendinitis reported reduced pain scores and were reported to have increased ROM after PEMF treatment.
A group of 83 adults with ununited fractures were examined for the effects of bone grafting and pulsed electromagnetic fields for this study. Results showed a successful healing rate of 87 percent in the original 38 patients treated with bone grafts and PEMF for ununited fractures with wide gaps, malalignment, and synovial pseudarthrosis. Of the 45 patients that were not successfully treated with PEMF and had bone grafting, when re-treated with pulsing electromagnetic fields, achieved a 93 percent success rate. ( I hope you can comprehend this – there was no union, meaning the bone did not heal until they used pulsed magnetic field therapy )
C.A. Bassett, et al., “Treatment of Therapeutically Resistant Non-unions with Bone Grafts and Pulsing Electromagnetic Fields,” Journal of Bone Joint Surg, 64(8), October 1982, p. 1214-1220.
Examining the effects of pulsing electromagnetic fields on 125 patients suffering from ununited fractures of the tibial diaphysis, showed a healing success rate of 87%.
C.A. Bassett, et al., “Treatment of Ununited Tibial Diaphyseal Fractures with Pulsing Electromagnetic Fields,” Journal of Bone Joint Surg, 63(4), April 1981, p. 511-523.
Results of this double-blind, placebo-controlled study indicated that pulsed electromagnetic field therapy exhibited significant beneficial effects in the treatment of patients suffering from persistent rotator cuff tendonitis.
A. Binder, Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy of Persistent Rotator Cuff Tendinitis. A Double-blind Controlled Assessment, Lancet, 1(8379), March 31, 1984, p. 695-698.
On review, after applying external electromagnetic fields ranging 5 to 8 Hz, large improvements were detected in Alzheimer’s patients. These included improved visual memory, drawing performance, spatial orientation, mood, short-term memory and social interactions.
R. Sandyk, “Alzheimer’s Disease: Improvement of Visual Memory and Visuoconstructive Performance Treatment with Picotesla Range Magnetic Fields,” International Journal of Neurosci, 76(3-4),
June 1994, p. 185-225.
As generally supported, a persons biological daily clock may causally be related to memory deterioration in Alzheimer’s patients and in the ageing. Synchronizing of the circadian rhythms using magnetic fields, (this article suggests) could lead to improved memory for those affected.
R. Sandyk, et al., “Age-related Disruption of Circadian Rhythms: Possible Relationship to Memory Impairment and Implications for Therapy with Magnetic Fields,” International Journal of Neurosci, 59(4), August 1991, p. 259-262.
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (Lou Gehrig’s Disease)
A study of three patients with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis were treated with a pulsed magnetic field administered by a Magnobiopulse apparatus. Given three times a week for approximately 75 sessions to achieve maximum benefits, all three experienced beneficial effects.
A. Bellosi & R. Berget, “Pulsed Magnetic Fields: A Glimmer of Hope for Patients Suffering from Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis,” Second World Congress for Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine,
8-13 June 1997, Bologna, Italy.
Results of this double-blind, placebo-controlled study indicated that treatment with two 30-minute sessions of noninvasive pulsed radio frequency therapy is effective in significantly decreasing the time required for edema reduction in patients suffering from lateral ankle sprains.
A.A. Pilla & L. Kloth, “Effect of Pulsed Radio Frequency Therapy on Edema in Ankle Sprains: A Multisite Double-Blind Clinical Study,” Second World Congress for Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine,
8-13 June 1997, Bologna, Italy, p. 300.
Three hours of exposure to a 50-Hz magnetic field in this study revealed that experimentally induced inflammation and suppressed arthritis in rats was significantly inhibited as a result.
Y. Mizushima, et al., “Effects of Magnetic Field on Inflammation,” Experientia, 31(12),
December 15, 1975, p.1411-1412.
Another double-blind, placebo-controlled research study on the effects of pulsed electrical fields administered over a 4 week period revealed significant improvement in patients receiving the therapy relative to the controls.
J.C. Reynolds, “The Use of Implantable Direct Current Stimulation in Bone Grafted Foot and Ankle Arthrodeses: A Retrospective Review,” Second World Congress for Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine,
8-13 June 1997, Bologna, Italy.
In this general review article on the treatment of patients with psoriatic arthritis with magnetic fields, the authors state that an alternating low-frequency magnetic field (30-40 mT) from such generators as “Polius-1″ and “Polius-101″ improves the clinical state of afflicted joints. Such treatments are normally carried out for 30 minutes per day over a period of 15 to 20 days.
V.D. Grigor’eva, et al., “Therapeutic Use of Physical Factors in Complex Therapy of Patients with Psoriatic Arthritis,” Vopr Kurortol Fizioter Lech Fiz Kult, (6), 1995, p. 48-51
This research studied the effects of magnetolaser therapy alone or combined with conventional drugs in rheumatoid arthritis patients. This treatment utilized a AMLT-01 device for magnetolaser therapy and consisted of 14 days with 6 minute exposures daily. An obvious improvement was seen after 3 days of treatment, with greater improvement by patients suffering from mild to moderate levels of the disease. End results computed into a 90 percent patient improvement rate.
9B.Y. Drozdovski, et al., “Use of Magnetolaser Therapy with an AMLT-01 Apparatus in Complex Therapy for Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Fiz Med, 4(1-2), 1994, p. 101-102
This study on 7 to 14 year old juveniles suffering from rheumatoid arthritis examined effects of low-frequency magnetic fields from a Polius-1 device. Ten daily treatment exposures of 10 to 12 minutes each were conducted on three experimental groups. The three groups showed 58, 76, 37 percent beneficial effects from the treatment.
E.A. Shlyapok, et al., “Use of Alternating Low-Frequency Magnetic Fields in Combination with Radon Baths for Treatment of Juvenile Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Vopr Kurortol Fizioter Lech Fiz Kult, 4,
1992, p. 13-17.
Low frequency and constant magnetic fields in patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthrosis was the focus of this study. Patients with stages 1 & 2 rheumatoid arthritis as well as patients with osteoarthrosis deformans, showed the beneficial effects from treatments. These low frequency, constant magnetic fields were found especially beneficial to the knees, ankles and wrists.
V.D. Grigor’eva, et al., “Therapeutic Application of Low-Frequency and Constant Magnetic Fields in Patients with Osteoarthritis Deformans and Rheumatoid Arthritis,” Vopr Kurortol Fizioter Lech Fiz Kult, 4, 1980, p. 29-35.
This review article makes the following observations with respect to the use of pulsed electromagnetic fields in treating ununited fractures, failed arthrodeses, and congenital pseudarthroses. The treatment has been shown to be more than 90 percent effective in adult patients. In cases where union does not occur with PEMFs alone after approximately four months, PEMF treatment coupled with fresh bone grafts ensures a maximum failure rate of only 1 to 1.5 percent. For those with delayed union three to four months following fracture, PEMFs appear to be more successful than in patients treated with other conservative methods. For more serious conditions, including infected nonunions, multiple surgical failures, long-standing atrophic lesions, failed knee arthrodeses after removal of infected prostheses, and congenital pseudarthroses, PEMF treatment has exhibited success in most patients.17
C.A. Bassett, “The Development and Application of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields (PEMFs) for Ununited Fractures and Arthrodeses,” Clin Plast Surg, 12(2), April 1985, p. 259-277.
Results of this study found that 35 of 44 nonunited scaphoid fractures 6 months or older healed in a mean time of 4.3 months during pulsed electromagnetic field treatment using external coils and a thumb spica cast.
G.K. Frykman, et al., “Treatment of Nonunited Scaphoid Fractures Pulsed Electromagnetic Field and Cast,” Journal of Hand Surg, 11(3), May 1986, p. 344-349.
This double-blind, placebo-controlled study examined the effects of pulsed electromagnetic fields in femoral neck fracture patients undergoing conventional therapy. PEMF treatment was started within two weeks of fracture, and patients were instructed to make use of the electromagnetic device for 8 hours per day over a 90-day period. Results showed beneficial effects relative to controls after 18 months of follow-up.
E. Betti, et al., “Effect of Electromagnetic Field Stimulation on Fractures of the Femoral Neck. A Prospective Randomized Double-Blind Study,”; Second World Congress for Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and Medicine, 8-13 June 1997, Bologna, Italy.
Results of this double-blind study showed significant healing effects of low-frequency pulsing electromagnetic fields in patients treated with femoral intertrochanteric osteotomy for hip degenerative arthritis.
G. Borsalino, et al., “Electrical Stimulation of Human Femoral Intertrochanteric Osteotomies. Double-Blind Study,” Clin Orthop, (237), December 1988, . 256- 263.
In this study, 147 patients with fractures of the tibia, femur, and humerus who had failed to benefit from surgery-received treatment with external skeletal fixation in situ and pulsed electromagnetic fields. Results indicated an overall success rate of 73 percent. Femur union was seen in 81 percent and tibia union in 75 percent.
M. Marcer, et al., “Results of Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields (PEMFs) in Ununited Fractures after External Skeletal Fixation,” Clin Orthop, (190), November 1984, . 260-265
This study examined the effects of extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (1-1000 Hz, 4 gauss) on new bone fractures of female patients. Results led the authors to suggest that EMF treatment accelerates the early stages of fracture healing.
O. Wahlstrom, “Stimulation of Fracture Healing with Electromagnetic Fields of Extremely Low Frequency (EMF of ELF),” Clin Orthop, (186), June 1984, . 293- 301.
This study examined the preventive effects of low-frequency pulsing electromagnetic fields against delayed union in rat fibular osteotomies and diaphyseal tibia fractures in humans. Results indicated such treatment modulated and accelerated fracture union in both groups.
A.W. Dunn & G.A. Rush, 3d, “Electrical Stimulation in Treatment of Delayed Union and Nonunion of Fractures and Osteotomies,” Southern Medical Journal, 77(12),December 1984, . 1530-1534.
This article discusses the cases of two children with bone malunion following lengthening of congenitally shortened lower legs. Pulsed sinusoidal magnetic field treatment was beneficial for both patients.
F. Rajewski & W. Marciniak, “Use of Magnetotherapy for Treatment of Bone Malunion in Limb Lengthening. Preliminary Report,” Chir Narzadow Ruchu Ortop Pol, 57(1-3), 1992,. 247-249.
Results of this study showed that 13 of 15 cases of long bone nonunion treated with pulsed electromagnetic fields in combination with Denham external fixator united within several months.
R.B. Simonis, et al., “The Treatment of Non-union Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields Combined with a Denham External Fixator,” Injury, 15(4), January 1984, . 255-260.
Results of this study found electromagnetic field stimulation to be an effective treatment for nonunion among a group of 37 French
L. Sedel, et al., “Acceleration of Repair of Non-unions electromagnetic Fields,” Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot, 67(1), 1981, . 11-23.
Results of this study found treatment induced pulsing to be beneficial in patients suffering from nonunions unresponsive to surgery.>
J.C. Mulier & F. Spaas, “Out-patient Treatment of Surgically Resistant Non-unions Induced Pulsing Current – Clinical Results,” Arch Orthop Trauma Surg, 97(4), 1980,.293-297.
In this interview with Dr. C. Andrew L. Bassett, a physician researching the use of pulsed electromagnetic fields for the past 30 years at Columbia University’s Orthopedic Research Lab, Dr. Bassett notes that approximately 10,000 of the 12,000-plus orthopedic surgeons in the U.S. have used pulsed electromagnetic fields on at least one patient. Many such surgeons have incorporated the therapy on a more regular basis. He estimates that a total of at least 65,000 patients nationwide have received the treatment, with a probable success rate of between 80 and 90 percent. Use of the treatment has been primarily in patients suffering from nonunited fractures, fusion failures, and pseudoarthrosis.
C.A. Bassett, “Conversations with C. Andrew L. Bassett, M.D. Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields. A Noninvasive Therapeutic Modality for Fracture Nonunion (Interview),” Orthop. Review, 15(12)1986 781-795.
Results of this study showed pulsed electromagnetic fields to have beneficial healing effects in patients suffering from difficult to treat and surgically resistant bone nonunions.
This review article notes that the use of pulsed electromagnetic fields began in 1974, and that 250,000 nonunion patients have received the treatment since. The author argues that success rates are comparable to those of bone grafting, and that PEMF treatment is more cost-effective and free of side effects. The FDA approved PEMF use in 1982, although it remains widely unused due to physician misunderstanding and lack of knowledge concerning the treatment.
A. Bassett, “Therapeutic Uses of Electric and Magnetic Fields in Orthopedics,& quot; in D.O. Carpenter & S. Ayrapetyan, (eds.), Biological Effects of Electric and Magnetic Fields. Volume II: beneficial and Harmful Effects, San Diego: Academic Press, 1994, . 13-48.
This 7-year study examined data on more than 11,000 cases of nonunions treated with pulsed electromagnetic fields for up to 10 to 12 hours per day. Results indicated an overall success rate of 75 percent.
A.A. Goldberg, “Computer Analysis of Data on More than 11,000 Cases of Ununited Fracture Submitted for Treatment with Pulsing Electromagnetic Fields,” Bioelectrical Repair and Growth Society, Second Annual Meeting,20-22 September 1982, Oxford, UK, . 61.
This study examined the effects of low-frequency electromagnetic fields (1-1000 Hz) on middle-aged female patients suffering from fresh radius fractures. Results showed significant increases in scintimetric activity surrounding the fracture area after two weeks of EMF treatment relative to controls.
O. Wahlstrom, “Electromagnetic Fields Used in the Treatment of Fresh Fractures of the Radius,” Bioelectrical Repair and Growth Society, Second Annual Meeting, 20-22 September 1982, Oxford, UK, . 26.
This study examined the effects of constant magnetic fields in patients suffering from fractures. Results showed that magnetic exposure reduced pain and the onset of edema shortly after trauma. Where edema was already present, the treatment exhibited marked anti-inflammatory effects. The strongest beneficial effects occurred in patients suffering from fractures of the ankle joints.
G.B. Gromak & G.A. Lacis, “Evaluations of the Efficacy of Using a Constant Magnetic Field in Treatment of Patients with Traumas,” in I. Detlav, (ed.), Electromagnetic Therapy of Injuries and Diseases of the Support-Motor Apparatus. International Collection of Papers, Riga, Latvia: Riga Medical Institute,1987, . 88-95.<
Results of this study found that 10 hours per day of electromagnetic stimulation (1.0-1.5 mV) produced complete union in 23 of 26 patients receiving the treatment for nonjoined fractures.
A.F. Lynch & P. MacAuley, “Treatment of Bone Non-Union Electromagnetic Therapy,” Ir Journal of Med Sci, 154(4), 1985, . 153-155.
This review article looks at the history of pulsed electromagnetic fields as a means of bone repair. The author argues that success rates have been either superior or equivalent to those of surgery, with PEMF free of side effects and risk.
C.A.L. Bassett, “Historical Overview of PEM-Assisted Bone and Tissue Healing, ” Bioelectromagnetics Society, 10th Annual Meeting, 19-24 June 1988, Stamford, CT, . 19.
Results of this double-blind, placebo-controlled study indicated that both low-frequency electromagnetic field treatment and treatment with pulsed electromagnetic fields proved effective in patients suffering from chronic bronchitis when coupled with standard drug therapies. Magnetic field treatment consisted of a total of 15 15-20-minute daily exposures.
V.M. Iurlov, et al., “The Efficacy of the Use of Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields in Chronic Bronchitis,” Voen Med Zh, 3, 1989, . 35-36.
Results of this study found that prolonged exposure to a 7-tesla uniform static magnetic field for a period of 64 hours inhibited growth of three human tumor cell lines in vitro.
R.R. Raylman, et al., “Exposure to Strong Static Magnetic Field Slows the Growth of Human Cancer Cells in Vitro,” Bioelectromagnetics, 17(5), 1996, . 358-363.
This study examined the effects of a rotational magnetic field on a group of 51 breast cancer patients. Results showed a significant positive response in 27 of them.
N.G. Bakhmutskii, et al., “The Assessment of the Efficacy of the Effect of a Rotational Magnetic Field on the Course of the Tumor Process in Patients with Generalized Breast Cancer,” Sov Med, (7), 1991, . 25-27.
Results of this study indicated that exposure to a rotational magnetic field inhibited Walker’s carcinoma tumor growth as much as 90 percent in some cases.
N.G. Bakhmutskii, et al., “The Growth Dynamics of Walker Carcinosarcoma During Exposure to a Magnetic Eddy Field,” Vopr Onkol, 37(6), 1991, . 705-708.
Results of this study indicated that pulsed magnetic field stimulation increased the incorporation of antitumor agents into cells, and thus increased antitumor activity shifting the cell cycle to a proliferative from a nonproliferative phase.
Y. Omote, “An Experimental Attempt to Potentiate Therapeutic Effects of Combined Use of Pulsing Magnetic Fields and Antitumor Agents,” Nippon Geka Gakkai Zasshi, 89(8), August 1988, .. 1155-1166.
Results of this study found that 20-30 sessions of magnetotherapy administered preoperatively exhibited antitumor effects in patients suffering from lung cancer.
L.S. Ogorodnikova, et al., “Morphological Criteria of Lung Cancer Regression Under the Effect of Magnetotherapy,” Vopr Onkol, 26(1), 1980, . 28-34.