Headache Treatment with Pulsing Electromagnetic Fields: A Literature Review

2007 ◽  
Vol 32 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 191-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilson Vincent ◽  
Frank Andrasik ◽  
Richard Sherman
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Aranha Sousa Maués ◽  
Rafaela Seixas Pinho ◽  
Aline Cristine Passos de Souza

Background: Post-spinal anesthesia headache is a common complication of this procedure due to the loss of cerebrospinal fluid through the puncture orifice. Resolution may be spontaneous or require interventions such as presented in this study. Objective: To address the most relevant and current aspects of post-spinal anesthesia headache treatment. Methods: Literature review based on Pubmed, Scielo and Google Scholar databases, having as inclusion criteria articles of great published in English, Portuguese and Spanish in the period 2016 to 2021 and exclusion criteria articles published outside that period. Results: Post-spinal anesthesia headache or post-dural puncture headache (DPC) is divided into disabling headache and non-disabling headache in order to guide its management. In non-disabling headache, analgesics, caffeine and hydration are used. In disabling headache, blood-patching can be performed from the injection of autologous blood in the epidural space in order to buffer the puncture hole. In addition to this technique, there is the blockade of the sphenuous- palatine ganglion, which is performed by applying 5% lidocaine with the aid of a swab, introduced perpendicularly to the nasopharynx, where the sphenuous ganglion is located – palatine ,inhibiting vasodilation from the blockage of parasympathetic transmission and thus decreasing the intensity of headache, considering the approachless invasive and with fewer complications, but that needs to be better studied for its application. Conclusion: The treatment of mistraining cppd from conservative to more invasive procedures and with a higher risk of complications. Due to the above, studies should be encouraged to expand the therapeutic arsenal of this disabling headache.


2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. 85567-85583
Author(s):  
Pedro Henrique Bersan Menezes ◽  
Igor Gifoni Aragão ◽  
Rodrigo Horta de Souza Rosario ◽  
Yasmin de Oliveira D’Avila de Araujo ◽  
Felipe Moraes Cortez Gurgel ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
David Andrew McNamee ◽  
Alexandre G. Legros ◽  
Daniel R. Krewski ◽  
Gerald Wisenberg ◽  
Frank S. Prato ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Lars-Gunnar Gunnarsson ◽  
Lennart Bodin

Objectives: We conducted a systematic literature review to identify studies fulfilling good scientific epidemiological standards for use in meta-analyses of occupational risk factors for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Methods: We identified 79 original publications on associations between work and ALS. The MOOSE (Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) and GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations) guidelines were used to ensure high scientific quality, and reliable protocols were applied to classify the articles. Thirty-seven articles fulfilled good scientific standards, while 42 were methodologically deficient and thus were excluded from our meta-analyses. Results: The weighted relative risks for the various occupational exposures were respectively; 1.29 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.97–1.72; six articles) for heavy physical work, 3.98 (95% CI: 2.04–7.77; three articles) for professional sports, 1.45 (95% CI: 1.07–1.96; six articles) for metals, 1.19 (95% CI: 1.07–1.33; 10 articles) for chemicals, 1.18 (95% CI: 1.07–1.31; 16 articles) for electromagnetic fields or working with electricity, and 1.18 (95% CI: 1.05–1.34; four articles) for working as a nurse or physician. Conclusions: Meta-analyses based only on epidemiologic publications of good scientific quality show that the risk of ALS is statistically significantly elevated for occupational exposures to excessive physical work, chemicals (especially pesticides), metals (especially lead), and possibly also to electromagnetic fields and health care work. These results are not explained by publication bias.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document