Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2026
Efficacy and safety of low- and high-intensity magnetic field therapies for orthopedic pain: a systematic review.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Silva Ludimila Dias, Batista Joelington Dias, Batista Jobson Dias, Pereira Gabrielly Santos, da Silva Marcelo Lourenço
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Orthopedic and musculoskeletal pain is a leading cause of disability worldwide, and many patients continue to experience suboptimal relief despite advances in pharmacological and physical therapies. Magnetic field-based interventions, including pulsed electromagnetic field therapy (PEMF) and repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS), have emerged as non-invasive approaches for pain modulation and functional improvement. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of low-intensity (PEMF) and high-intensity (rPMS) magnetic field therapies in adults with musculoskeletal conditions.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials published between 2015 and 2025 were identified through searches in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. Eligible studies compared PEMF or rPMS with sham, placebo, or standard care and reported outcomes related to pain intensity, functional performance, and safety.
RESULTS: Eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Most included studies reported reductions in pain and improvements in functional outcomes, including the Oswestry Disability Index and WOMAC. No serious adverse events were reported. PEMF was primarily linked to sustained analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects, whereas rPMS showed faster pain reduction, likely related to neuromuscular activation and modulation of descending inhibitory pathways. Some studies reported greater benefits using higher stimulation intensities or combining therapy with exercise.
DISCUSSION: Magnetic field therapies appear to be safe and well tolerated, with potential benefits for pain and function for the management of musculoskeletal pain. Their complementary mechanisms suggest potential clinical synergy; however, larger and more standardized trials are needed to establish optimal protocols and long-term effectiveness.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251170876, PROSPERO CRD420251170876.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials published between 2015 and 2025 were identified through searches in PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. Eligible studies compared PEMF or rPMS with sham, placebo, or standard care and reported outcomes related to pain intensity, functional performance, and safety.
RESULTS: Eight RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Most included studies reported reductions in pain and improvements in functional outcomes, including the Oswestry Disability Index and WOMAC. No serious adverse events were reported. PEMF was primarily linked to sustained analgesic and anti-inflammatory effects, whereas rPMS showed faster pain reduction, likely related to neuromuscular activation and modulation of descending inhibitory pathways. Some studies reported greater benefits using higher stimulation intensities or combining therapy with exercise.
DISCUSSION: Magnetic field therapies appear to be safe and well tolerated, with potential benefits for pain and function for the management of musculoskeletal pain. Their complementary mechanisms suggest potential clinical synergy; however, larger and more standardized trials are needed to establish optimal protocols and long-term effectiveness.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD420251170876, PROSPERO CRD420251170876.