Efficacy of Magnetic Therapy in Pain Reduction in Patients with Chronic Pelvic Pain: A Systematic Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design
2.2. Search Strategy
2.3. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
2.4. Eligibility Criteria and Internal Validity Assessment
3. Results
3.1. Study Selection and Methodological Quality Evaluation
3.2. Description of the General Characteristics of the Studies Included
3.3. Description of the Characteristics of the Study Sample
3.4. Description of the Intervention Group and Control Group
3.4.1. Description of the Intervention Protocol of the Electromagnetic Therapy
3.4.2. Description of the Intervention Protocol of the Comparison Group
3.5. Description of the Variables and Measurement Tools
4. Discussion
4.1. Characteristics of the Sample
4.2. Measuring Instruments
4.3. Intervention Strategies of Magnetic Field Therapy
4.4. Implications for Clinical Practice
4.5. Limitations
4.6. Future Studies
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
References
- Dydyk, A.M.; Gupta, N. Chronic Pelvic Pain. In StatPearls; StatPearls Publishing: Treasure Island, FL, USA, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Klotz, S.G.R.; Schön, M.; Ketels, G.; Löwe, B.; Brünahl, C.A. Physiotherapy Management of Patients with Chronic Pelvic Pain (CPP): A Systematic Review. Physiother. Theory Pract. 2019, 35, 516–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- EAU Guidelines on Chronic Pelvic Pain; EAU Annual Congress: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; ISBN 978-94-92671-16-5.
- Cid, J. Dolor Pélvico Crónico. Rev. Soc. Española Dolor 2006, 13, 29–39. [Google Scholar]
- Kotarinos, R. Myofascial Pelvic Pain. Curr. Pain Headache Rep. 2012, 16, 433–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Raimondo, D.; Cocchi, L.; Raffone, A.; del Forno, S.; Iodice, R.; Maletta, M.; Aru, A.C.; Salucci, P.; Ambrosio, M.; Mollo, A.; et al. Pelvic Floor Dysfunction at Transperineal Ultrasound and Chronic Constipation in Women with Endometriosis. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Adamian, L.; Urits, I.; Orhurhu, V.; Hoyt, D.; Driessen, R.; Freeman, J.A.; Kaye, A.D.; Kaye, R.J.; Garcia, A.J.; Cornett, E.M.; et al. A Comprehensive Review of the Diagnosis, Treatment, and Management of Urologic Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome. Curr. Pain Headache Rep. 2020, 24, 27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hellman, K.M.; Patanwala, I.Y.; Pozolo, K.E.; Tu, F.F. Multimodal Nociceptive Mechanisms Underlying Chronic Pelvic Pain. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2015, 213, 827.e1–827.e9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lamvu, G.; Carrillo, J.; Witzeman, K.; Alappattu, M. Musculoskeletal Considerations in Female Patients with Chronic Pelvic Pain. Semin. Reprod. Med. 2018, 36, 107–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fuentes-Márquez, P.; Cabrera-Martos, I.; Valenza, M.C. Physiotherapy Interventions for Patients with Chronic Pelvic Pain: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Physiother. Theory Pract. 2019, 35, 1131–1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quek, P. A Critical Review on Magnetic Stimulation: What Is Its Role in the Management of Pelvic Floor Disorders? Curr. Opin. Urol. 2005, 15, 231–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- He, Q.; Xiao, K.; Peng, L.; Lai, J.; Li, H.; Luo, D.; Wang, K. An Effective Meta-Analysis of Magnetic Stimulation Therapy for Urinary Incontinence. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 9077. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Samuels, J.B.; Pezzella, A.; Berenholz, J.; Alinsod, R. Safety and Efficacy of a Non-Invasive High-Intensity Focused Electromagnetic Field (HIFEM) Device for Treatment of Urinary Incontinence and Enhancement of Quality of Life. Lasers Surg. Med. 2019, 51, 760–766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pérez-Martínez, C.; Vargas-Díaz, I.B. Neuromodulación por terapia de ondas electromagnéticas (silla de Neotonus) para incontinencia urinaria de urgencia (IUU); experiencia en México. Rev. Mex. Urol. 2011, 71, 156–159. [Google Scholar]
- Markov, M.S. Magnetic Field Therapy: A Review. Electromagn. Biol. Med. 2007, 26, 1–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Page, M.J.; Moher, D.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. PRISMA 2020 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated Guidance and Exemplars for Reporting Systematic Reviews. BMJ 2021, 372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schiavo, J.H. PROSPERO: An International Register of Systematic Review Protocols. Med. Ref. Serv. Q. 2019, 38, 171–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Linares-Espinós, E.; Hernández, V.; Domínguez-Escrig, J.L.; Fernández-Pello, S.; Hevia, V.; Mayor, J.; Padilla-Fernández, B.; Ribal, M.J. Methodology of a Systematic Review. Actas Urol. Esp. 2018, 42, 499–506. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Cashin, A.G.; McAuley, J.H. Clinimetrics: Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) Scale. J. Physiother. 2020, 66, 59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kessler, T.M.; Mordasini, L.; Weisstanner, C.; Jüni, P.; da Costa, B.R.; Wiest, R.; Thalmann, G.N. Sono-Electro-Magnetic Therapy for Treating Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome in Men: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind Trial. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e113368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- He, W.; Sun, Z.; Wang, G. Clinical Efficacy of Magnetic Resonance Electromagnetic Therapy Combined with Qianlie Beixi Capsules in the Treatment of Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome. Natl. J. Androl. 2020, 26, 452–456. [Google Scholar]
- Brown, C.S.; Ling, F.W.; Wan, J.Y.; Pilla, A.A. Efficacy of Static Magnetic Field Therapy in Chronic Pelvic Pain: A Double-Blind Pilot Study. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 2002, 187, 1581–1587. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Paick, J.S.; Lee, S.C.; Ku, J.H. More Effects of Extracorporeal Magnetic Innervation and Terazosin Therapy than Terazosin Therapy Alone for Non-Inflammatory Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: A Pilot Study. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis. 2006, 9, 261–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rowe, E.; Smith, C.; Laverick, L.; Elkabir, J.; O’n Witherow, R.; Patel, A. A Prospective, Randomized, Placebo Controlled, Double-Blind Study of Pelvic Electromagnetic Therapy for the Treatment of Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome with 1 Year of Followup. J. Urol. 2005, 173, 2044–2047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Badawy, M.M.; Muaidi, Q.I. Cardio Respiratory Response: Validation of New Modifications of Bruce Protocol for Exercise Testing and Training in Elite Saudi Triathlon and Soccer Players. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 2019, 26, 105–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salman, M.; Khan, A.H.; Sulaiman, S.A.S.; Hughes, J.; Khan, J.H.; Hussain, K. The Modified Urdu Version of International Prostate Symptom Score: A Psychometric Validation Study. Turk. J. Urol. 2018, 44, 335–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Targum, S.D.; Hassman, H.; Pinho, M.; Fava, M. Development of a Clinical Global Impression Scale for Fatigue. J. Psychiatry Res. 2012, 46, 370–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Stocks, S.J.; Giles, S.J.; Cheraghi-Sohi, S.; Campbell, S.M. Application of a Tool for the Evaluation of Public and Patient Involvement in Research. BMJ Open 2015, 5, e006390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Lorençatto, C.; Petta, C.A.; Navarro, M.J.; Bahamondes, L.; Matos, A. Depression in Women with Endometriosis with and without Chronic Pelvic Pain. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 2006, 85, 88–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guo, H.; Xu, Y.-M.; Ye, Z.-Q.; Yu, J.-H. Levels of cytokines and heat-shock protein 70 in the seminal plasma of patients with chronic bacterial prostatitis and chronic prostatitis/chronic pelvic pain syndrome. Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue 2012, 18, 1088–1092. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Y.; Wu, X.; Liu, J.; Tang, W.; Zhao, T.; Zhang, J. Effects of a 6-Month Course of Tamsulosin for Chronic Prostatitis/Chronic Pelvic Pain Syndrome: A Multicenter, Randomized Trial. World J. Urol. 2011, 29, 381–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Databases | Search Strategy |
---|---|
PubMed | (“Chronic pelvic pain” OR “chronic pelvic pain syndrome”) AND (“Magnetic stimulation” OR “Electromagnetic” OR “Electromagnetic stimulation” OR “Magnetic neuromodulation” OR “Electro-magnetic therapy” OR “Pelvic electromagnetic therapy”) 9 results |
COCHRANE | #1 MeSH descriptor: [Pelvic Pain] explode all trees 1256 #2 MeSH descriptor: [Chronic Pain] explode all trees 2815 #3 MeSH descriptor: [Magnetic Field Therapy] explode all trees 1689 #4 (electromagnetic field therapy): ti, ab, kw 514 #5 (magnetic field therapy): ti, ab, kw 953 #6 MeSH descriptor: [Pain] explode all trees 52801 #7 (pelvic chronic pain): ti, ab, kw 1269 #8 (pelvic chronic pain syndrome): ti, ab, kw 603 #9 (chronic pelvic pain): ti, ab, kw 1269 #10 (chronic pelvic pain syndrome): ti, ab, kw 603 #11 (electromagnetic therapy): ti, ab, kw 872 #12 (magnetic field therapy): ti, ab, kw 953 (#6 AND (#1 AND #2) AND #3) OR ((#7 OR #8 OR #9 OR #10) AND (#4 OR #5 OR #11 OR #12)) 13 results. |
BVS | (tw: ((“pelvic chronic pain” OR “chronic pelvic pain” OR “chronic pelvic pain syndrome”))) AND (tw: ((“electromagnetico therapy” OR “magnetic field therapy” OR “extracorporeal magnetic innervation”))) and (tw: (random *)) 6 results |
PEDro | SIMPLE: “Magnetic field therapy” “chronic pelvic pain” 1 resultado “electromagnetic therapy” “chronic pelvic pain” 1 resultado “magnetic therapy” “chronic pelvic pain” 2 resultados 4 results ADVANCED: Abstract&title: “magnetic field therapy” “chronic pelvic pain” Therapy: electrotherapies, heat, cold Problem: pain Body part: perineum or genito-urinary system Subdiscipline: continence and women’s health Topic: chronic pain Method: clinical trial. 1 result. |
WEB OF SCIENCE | (“Chronic pelvic pain” OR “chronic pelvic pain syndrome”) AND (“Magnetic stimulation” OR “Electromagnetic” OR “Electromagnetic stimulation” OR “Magnetic neuromodulation” OR “Electro-magnetic therapy” OR “Pelvic electromagnetic therapy”) AND (“RCT” OR “Randomized controlled trial”) 7 results. |
MEDLINE | (“Chronic pelvic pain” OR “chronic pelvic pain syndrome”) AND (“Magnetic stimulation” OR “Electromagnetic” OR “Electromagnetic stimulation” OR “Magnetic neuromodulation” OR “Electro-magnetic therapy” OR “Pelvic electromagnetic therapy”) 5 results. |
SCOPUS | (“Chronic pelvic pain” OR “chronic pelvic pain syndrome”) AND (“Magnetic stimulation” OR “Electromagnetic” OR “Electromagnetic stimulation” OR “Magnetic neuromodulation” OR “Electro-magnetic therapy” OR “Pelvic electromagnetic therapy”) 36 results. |
Study | Total Score | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Brown et al., 2002 [25] | 8/10 | – | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | ||
Kessler et al., 2001 [17] | 9/10 | – | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | |
Rowe et al. [21] | 4/10 | – | × | × | × | × | ||||||
Paick et al., 2006 [20] | 7/10 | – | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | |||
He et al., 2020 [18] | /10 | – | × | × | × | × | × | × | × | × |
Article | PEDro Puntuation | Article Quality | Level of Evidence |
---|---|---|---|
Brown et al., 2002 [19] | 8/10 | Good | Level 1 |
Kessler et al., 2014 [17] | 9/10 | Excelent | Level 1 |
Rowe et al., 2004 [21] | 4/10 | Moderate | Level 2 |
Paick et al., 2006 [20] | 7/10 | Good | Level 1 |
He et al., 2020 [18] | 8/10 | Good | Level 1 |
Author | Type of Article | Inclusion Criteria | Exclusion Criteria | Intervention Group | Control Group |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rowe E. et al., 2004 [21] | RCT. N = 21 men | <70 years, diagnosed of CPP. | History of cancer Prostate. | Electromagnetic therapy 2 sessions per week for 4 weeks on the chair, Neotonus™. 15 min at 10 Hz and 50 Hz for another 15 min | It was applied with an identical form of device, but without activating it. |
Paick J-S et al., 2006 [20] | Pilot study. N = 40 men | Diagnosis of CPP, > 18 years old. | <6 months of symptoms, chronic/acute urethritis, stones in kidney, bladder cancer or prostate, medication antimicrobial/anti-inflammatory 4 weeks before the study. | Terazosin 2 mg once a day for the first 7 days, then, Terazosin 4 mg daily for the next 5 weeks. | Identical pharmacological treatment than the other group and 20 min sessions electromagnetic current in a seat. It was applied twice a week for 6 weeks. 10 Hz during 10 min, and then 50 Hz another 10 min. The system was used Neocontrol, Neonotus Inc. |
Kessler TM et al., 2014 [17] | RCT. N = 60 men | Patients with no improvement with other therapies in the last 15 weeks. | Chronic prostatitis bacterial tract infection urinary, post urine residue more than 100 mL, cancer of prostate or urethra and minors of 18 years. | The Sonodyn device device twice a day. | The same treatment was applied but the machine was not activated. |
Brown CS et al., 2002 [19] | Pilot study. N = 33 women | 18–50 years old, trigger point in abdomen to the palpation, with medication for 6 months, pelvic exam, and normal physique. | Pregnancy, breastfeeding, has a pacemaker or device electronic, having used magnetic therapy previously. | Medical magnets concentric bipolar BIOflex (Avon, Conn) applied at an intensity of 500 G in the surface with a diameter of 50 mm and 1.5 mm wide. Applied 24 h a day for 4 weeks. | The same treatment was applied but the machine was not activated. |
He W. et al., 2020 [18] | RCT. N = 124 men | 18–50 years old, CPP, not having been treated in the last week | Acute prostatitis and/or chronic bacterial infection, STD, disease metal, stenosis and/or surgery urethral. | Qianlie Beixi Capsules (QBC) 2.4 g was given for 14 days to patients before meals, combined with electromagnetic therapy with the RH device-CZCD Zhengzhou Renhui Medical Equipment Co. It was applied for 30 min a day using 180 mT intensity with 50 Hz. | Qianlie Beixi Capsules for 14 days. |
Author | Pain Results | Effects on Other Variables | Desertion |
---|---|---|---|
Rowe E et al., 2004 [21] | There was a statistically significant decrease in the intervention group, from 21.7/50 to 14.7/50 at 3 months in VAS; p < 0.05). There were no improvements in the placebo group, (p > 0.05). | There were no statistically significative improvements of urinary symptoms in the intervention group. There were no improvements in the control. | There were 4 dropouts; 1 in the intervention group, and 3 in the placebo group. |
Paick J-S et al., 2006 [20] | There was a statiscally significant improvement in NIH-CPSI score of the group with electromagnetism (p < 0.041). Intervention group had statistically significant improvements compared to the pharmacological group (p = 0.007). | PVR values and peak flow did not change after treatment. There were improvements in QOL in both groups, in the intervention group from 9.5 to 6.5 (p = 0.005), and in the case of the control group from 8 to 6 (p = 0.003). I-PSS obtained a better result in elegtromagnetism group with electromagnetism (p = 0.002) than in the pharmacological group (p = 0.55) | - |
Kessler TM et al., 2014 [17] | There was a decrease in NIH-CPSI scale in the intervention group (p = 0.7) and in the control group (p = 0.24). | Regarding quality of life, there were statistically significant differences between both groups (p = 0.015) Both groups had improvements in urinary symptons, being higher in intervention group, although they were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). There were no differences in the rest of the variables. | There was 1 dropout. |
Brown CS et al., 2002 [19] | The MPQ score showed great improvements in the intervention group patients, but these were not statiscally significant. PPI was reduced, but this was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). The PRI-T score improved in the intervention group (p > 0.08). The PDI score improved significantly in the intervention group compared to 4% of placebo group (p < 0.02). | In the CGI-S score, symptoms improved significant in 28% (p < 0.007) compared to the group placebo that improved by 10% (p < 0.02). | The study was divided into two parts, one part that lasted 2 weeks with 1 dropout; and another lasted 4 weeks, and there were 13 dropouts. |
He W et al., 2020 [18] | There was a statistically significant decrease in NIH-CPSI scale (p < 0.05). | Regarding micturition symptoms, the control group improved from the initial, being statistically significant (p < 0.05); however, for pain, the intervention group had statistically significant improvements compared to pretreatment and the control group. In QoL, in both groups there were statistically significant improvements. | There was not any desertion. |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
de Pedro Negri, A.M.; Ruiz Prieto, M.J.; Díaz-Mohedo, E.; Martín-Valero, R. Efficacy of Magnetic Therapy in Pain Reduction in Patients with Chronic Pelvic Pain: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 5824. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19105824
de Pedro Negri AM, Ruiz Prieto MJ, Díaz-Mohedo E, Martín-Valero R. Efficacy of Magnetic Therapy in Pain Reduction in Patients with Chronic Pelvic Pain: A Systematic Review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(10):5824. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19105824
Chicago/Turabian Stylede Pedro Negri, Alicia María, María Jesús Ruiz Prieto, Esther Díaz-Mohedo, and Rocío Martín-Valero. 2022. "Efficacy of Magnetic Therapy in Pain Reduction in Patients with Chronic Pelvic Pain: A Systematic Review" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 10: 5824. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19105824