Article

Double-blind placebo-controlled trial of static magnets for the treatment of osteoarthritis of the knee: results of a pilot study.

Division for Research and Education, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Alternative therapies in health and medicine (impact factor: 1.77). 10(2):36-43. pp.36-43
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Outpatient clinical studies of magnet therapy, a complementary therapy commonly used to treat osteoarthritis (OA), have been limited by the absence of a credible placebo control.
Our objective was to assess the feasibility and promise of studying static magnetic therapy for knee OA and determine the ability of a new placebo-magnet device to provide concealment of group assignment.
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial.
Academic teaching hospital in Boston.
We enrolled 29 subjects with idiopathic or post-traumatic OA of the knee.
Subjects received either high-strength magnetic (active) or placebo-magnetic (placebo) knee sleeve treatment for 4 hours in a monitored setting and self-treatment 6 hours daily for 6 weeks.
Primary outcomes were change in knee pain as measured by the WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index Pain Subscale at 6 weeks and extent of group concealment at study end.
At 4 hours, VAS pain scores (+/- SE) on a 5-item scale (0-500, 500 worst) decreased 79 +/- 18 mm in the active group and 10 +/- 21 mm in the placebo group (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in any primary or secondary measure of efficacy between the treatment groups at 6 weeks. Despite widespread testing for magnetic properties, at study end, 69% of the active group and 77% of the placebo group (P > 0.2) believed that they had been assigned to the active treatment group.
Despite our small sample size, magnets showed statistically significant efficacy compared to placebo after 4 hours under rigorously controlled conditions. The sustained efficacy of magnetic therapy for knee osteoarthritis could be assessed in an adequately powered trial utilizing an appropriate control such our new placebo-magnet device.

0 0
 · 
0 Bookmarks
 · 
12 Views
  • Source
    Article: Reporting methods of blinding in randomized trials assessing nonpharmacological treatments.
    Isabelle Boutron, Lydia Guittet, Candice Estellat, David Moher, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson, Philippe Ravaud
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Blinding is a cornerstone of treatment evaluation. Blinding is more difficult to obtain in trials assessing nonpharmacological treatment and frequently relies on "creative" (nonstandard) methods. The purpose of this study was to systematically describe the strategies used to obtain blinding in a sample of randomized controlled trials of nonpharmacological treatment. We systematically searched in Medline and the Cochrane Methodology Register for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing nonpharmacological treatment with blinding, published during 2004 in high-impact-factor journals. Data were extracted using a standardized extraction form. We identified 145 articles, with the method of blinding described in 123 of the reports. Methods of blinding of participants and/or health care providers and/or other caregivers concerned mainly use of sham procedures such as simulation of surgical procedures, similar attention-control interventions, or a placebo with a different mode of administration for rehabilitation or psychotherapy. Trials assessing devices reported various placebo interventions such as use of sham prosthesis, identical apparatus (e.g., identical but inactivated machine or use of activated machine with a barrier to block the treatment), or simulation of using a device. Blinding participants to the study hypothesis was also an important method of blinding. The methods reported for blinding outcome assessors relied mainly on centralized assessment of paraclinical examinations, clinical examinations (i.e., use of video, audiotape, photography), or adjudications of clinical events. This study classifies blinding methods and provides a detailed description of methods that could overcome some barriers of blinding in clinical trials assessing nonpharmacological treatment, and provides information for readers assessing the quality of results of such trials.
    PLoS Medicine 03/2007; 4(2):e61. · 16.27 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Article: Static magnetic field therapy: a critical review of treatment parameters.
    Agatha P Colbert, Helané Wahbeh, Noelle Harling, Erin Connelly, Heather C Schiffke, Cora Forsten, William L Gregory, Marko S Markov, James J Souder, Patricia Elmer, Valerie King
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Static magnetic field (SMF) therapy, applied via a permanent magnet attached to the skin, is used by people worldwide for self-care. Despite a lack of established SMF dosage and treatment regimens, multiple studies are conducted to evaluate SMF therapy effectiveness. Our objectives in conducting this review are to:(i) summarize SMF research conducted in humans; (ii) critically evaluate reporting quality of SMF dosages and treatment parameters and (iii) propose a set of criteria for reporting SMF treatment parameters in future clinical trials. We searched 27 electronic databases and reference lists. Only English language human studies were included. Excluded were studies of electromagnetic fields, transcranial magnetic stimulation, magnets placed on acupuncture points, animal studies, abstracts, posters and editorials. Data were extracted on clinical indication, study design and 10 essential SMF parameters. Three reviewers assessed quality of reporting and calculated a quality assessment score for each of the 10 treatment parameters. Fifty-six studies were reviewed, 42 conducted in patient populations and 14 in healthy volunteers. The SMF treatment parameters most often and most completely described were site of application, magnet support device and frequency and duration of application. Least often and least completely described were characteristics of the SMF: magnet dimensions, measured field strength and estimated distance of the magnet from the target tissue. Thirty-four (61%) of studies failed to provide enough detail about SMF dosage to permit protocol replication by other investigators. Our findings highlight the need to optimize SMF dosing parameters for individual clinical conditions before proceeding to a full-scale clinical trial.
    Evidence-based Complementary and Alternative Medicine 11/2007; 6(2):133-9. · 4.77 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Article: The therapeutic effect of a pulsed electromagnetic field on the reproductive patterns of male Wistar rats exposed to a 2.45-GHz microwave field.
    Sanjay Kumar, Kavindra Kumar Kesari, Jitendra Behari
    [show abstract] [hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Environmental exposure to man-made electromagnetic fields has been steadily increasing with the growing demand for electronic items that are operational at various frequencies. Testicular function is particularly susceptible to radiation emitted by electromagnetic fields. This study aimed to examine the therapeutic effects of a pulsed electromagnetic field (100 Hz) on the reproductive systems of male Wistar rats (70 days old). The experiments were divided into five groups: microwave sham, microwave exposure (2.45 GHz), pulsed electromagnetic field sham, pulsed electromagnetic field (100 Hz) exposure, and microwave/pulsed electromagnetic field exposure. The animals were exposed for 2 hours/day for 60 days. After exposure, the animals were sacrificed, their sperm was used for creatine and caspase assays, and their serum was used for melatonin and testosterone assays. The results showed significant increases in caspase and creatine kinase and significant decreases in testosterone and melatonin in the exposed groups. This finding emphasizes that reactive oxygen species (a potential inducer of cancer) are the primary cause of DNA damage. However, pulsed electromagnetic field exposure relieves the effect of microwave exposure by inducing Faraday currents. Electromagnetic fields are recognized as hazards that affect testicular function by generating reactive oxygen species and reduce the bioavailability of androgen to maturing spermatozoa. Thus, microwave exposure adversely affects male fertility, whereas pulsed electromagnetic field therapy is a non-invasive, simple technique that can be used as a scavenger agent to combat oxidative stress.
    Clinics (São Paulo, Brazil) 01/2011; 66(7):1237-45. · 1.59 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.

Keywords

29 subjects
 
4 hours
 
5-item scale
 
complementary therapy
 
credible placebo control
 
group assignment
 
group concealment
 
knee OA
 
knee osteoarthritis
 
knee pain
 
magnet therapy
 
magnetic therapy
 
new placebo-magnet device
 
Outpatient clinical studies
 
post-traumatic OA
 
powered trial utilizing
 
self-treatment 6 hours
 
static magnetic therapy
 
VAS pain scores
 
widespread testing