Peripheral magnetic stimulation for the treatment of fibromyalgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 1.4 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY

Pain management Pub Date : 2025-01-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-30 DOI:10.1080/17581869.2025.2459594

Alvin Leenus, Rayaan Rahman, Elad Dana, Cody Tran, Duncan Westwood, Evgeny E Osokin, Yasmine Hoydonckx, Massieh Moayedi, Salman Hirani, James S Khan

{"title":"Peripheral magnetic stimulation for the treatment of fibromyalgia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Alvin Leenus, Rayaan Rahman, Elad Dana, Cody Tran, Duncan Westwood, Evgeny E Osokin, Yasmine Hoydonckx, Massieh Moayedi, Salman Hirani, James S Khan","doi":"10.1080/17581869.2025.2459594","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives: To systematically review and conduct a meta-analysis of studies on peripheral magnetic stimulation (PMS) for fibromyalgia (FM) treatment.Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINHAL, Web of Science, and ProQuest databases were searched from inception to July 2023 for studies in adult patients with FM treated with PMS. Studies using transcranial magnetic stimulation were excluded.Results: Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 279 patients) were identified and included in the review. PMS regimens varied, ranging from 8 to 40 min per session over 3-84 days. All studies compared PMS to a visually and physically identical sham device without magnetic fields. Most of the included studies demonstrated positive findings for PMS on pain and functional outcomes. In our meta-analysis, PMS significantly reduced pain scores within 1-3 months (mean difference -1.86 on NRS, 95% confidence interval -2.85 to -0.87, p = 0.0002, I2 = 68%, 4 studies [154 participants], low quality of evidence), but not at ≥3 months (low quality of evidence). Minimal adverse effects were reported.Discussion: Evidence for PMS use in FM is encouraging for short-term benefit. However, heterogeneous patient populations, varied PMS regimens, and limited number of studies are important limitations. Large, high-quality RCTs are needed to confirm PMS benefits and to make definitive recommendations.Protocol registration: PROSPERO Identifier is CRD42021235164.","PeriodicalId":20000,"journal":{"name":"Pain management","volume":" ","pages":"45-53"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11801343/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain management","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17581869.2025.2459594","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To systematically review and conduct a meta-analysis of studies on peripheral magnetic stimulation (PMS) for fibromyalgia (FM) treatment.

Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINHAL, Web of Science, and ProQuest databases were searched from inception to July 2023 for studies in adult patients with FM treated with PMS. Studies using transcranial magnetic stimulation were excluded.

Results: Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (n = 279 patients) were identified and included in the review. PMS regimens varied, ranging from 8 to 40 min per session over 3-84 days. All studies compared PMS to a visually and physically identical sham device without magnetic fields. Most of the included studies demonstrated positive findings for PMS on pain and functional outcomes. In our meta-analysis, PMS significantly reduced pain scores within 1-3 months (mean difference -1.86 on NRS, 95% confidence interval -2.85 to -0.87, p = 0.0002, I² = 68%, 4 studies [154 participants], low quality of evidence), but not at ≥3 months (low quality of evidence). Minimal adverse effects were reported.

Discussion: Evidence for PMS use in FM is encouraging for short-term benefit. However, heterogeneous patient populations, varied PMS regimens, and limited number of studies are important limitations. Large, high-quality RCTs are needed to confirm PMS benefits and to make definitive recommendations.

Protocol registration: PROSPERO Identifier is CRD42021235164.

查看原文本刊更多论文

外周磁刺激治疗纤维肌痛：系统回顾和荟萃分析。

目的：对外周磁刺激（PMS）治疗纤维肌痛（FM）的研究进行系统回顾和荟萃分析。方法：检索MEDLINE、EMBASE、CENTRAL、CINHAL、Web of Science和ProQuest数据库，从成立到2023年7月，检索成年FM合并经前综合症患者的研究。经颅磁刺激的研究被排除在外。结果：6项随机对照试验（rct）（n = 279例患者）被纳入本综述。经前症候群治疗方案各不相同，每次治疗8到40分钟，持续3-84天。所有的研究都将PMS与视觉上和物理上完全相同但没有磁场的假装置进行了比较。大多数纳入的研究表明经前症候群对疼痛和功能结果有积极的影响。在我们的荟萃分析中，经前综合症在1-3个月内显著降低了疼痛评分（NRS的平均差异为-1.86,95%可信区间为-2.85至-0.87,p = 0.0002, I2 = 68%， 4项研究[154名受试者]，证据质量低），但在≥3个月时没有显著降低（证据质量低）。报告的不良反应最小。讨论：经前症候群用于FM的证据是令人鼓舞的短期效益。然而，不同的患者群体、不同的经前综合症治疗方案和有限的研究数量是重要的局限性。需要大量高质量的随机对照试验来证实经前症候群的益处并提出明确的建议。协议注册：PROSPERO标识符为CRD42021235164。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Pain management CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-

CiteScore

2.90

自引率

5.90%

发文量