pulsed electromagnetic field
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

522
(FIVE YEARS 142)

H-INDEX

34
(FIVE YEARS 4)

Author(s):  
Barbara Wagner ◽  
Margarete Steiner ◽  
Lovro Markovic ◽  
Richard Crevenna

Summary Background Post-COVID-19 fatigue is a frequent symptom in COVID-19 survivors, which substantially limits patients to achieve full recovery and potentially restrains return to work. The previous literature has not yet reported the use of pulsed electromagnetic fields in this indication. Methods Over the course of 5 weeks, 10 sessions of pulsed electromagnetic field treatment with a high magnetic flux density were applied to a patient suffering from post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome. Fatigue, work ability, quality of life as well as anxiety, depression, stress level, and resilience were evaluated using validated patient-reported outcome measures. Results Fatigue, work ability, quality of life, and psychological well-being improved clearly over the course of the treatment and showed stable results 6 weeks later. Conclusion The use of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy with a device that allows sufficient penetration of the body tissue might be a promising physical modality to manage post-COVID-19 fatigue syndrome, which could reduce clinical and economic health consequences. Clinical sham-controlled studies are needed to evaluate the effect of pulsed electromagnetic fields in this indication.


Author(s):  
Mitushi Deshmukh ◽  
Neha Chitale

Introduction: The varying levels of lipids in the blood is defined as lipid profile, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol and triglycerides are most commonly reported. Pulsed Electromagnetic field therapy, is a therapy involves powerful pulsed energy waves passing through injured and damaged area of body of patients. Waves of pulsed electromagnetic field are painless and quick to pass through the damaged cells in the damaged region, increasing the oxygen pressure activating and regenerating cells. Methodology:  A Total of 40 subjects will be included in the study. Divided in two groups 20 in group 1 and 20 in group 2.Group 1 will receive Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy (PEMF) with aerobic and resistance exercises while Group 2 will receive aerobic and resistance training exercises as conventional physiotherapy technique. Discussion: 13 meta-analyses were categorized by Pedersen and Saltin, they have reported lipid profile involvement following exercise. They have described that exercise have a positive effect on the pathogenesis, physical fitness of individuals with dyslipidaemia. Effect of exercise profile on lipid have been stated in few studies. This study will focus on studying the impact of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy on lipid profile. Conclusion: Conclusion will be drawn based on the outcome measures of the study and the statistical analysis.


2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (24) ◽  
pp. 11677
Author(s):  
Vadim S. Ziborov ◽  
Tatyana O. Pleshakova ◽  
Ivan D. Shumov ◽  
Andrey F. Kozlov ◽  
Anastasia A. Valueva ◽  
...  

Our present study concerns the influence of the picosecond rise-time-pulsed electromagnetic field, and the impact of nanosecond pulsed pressure on the aggregation state of horseradish peroxidase (HRP) as a model enzyme. The influence of a 640 kV/m pulsed electromagnetic field with a pulse rise-time of ~200 ps on the activity and aggregation state of an enzyme is studied by the single-molecule atomic force microscopy (AFM) method. The influence of such a field is shown to lead to aggregation of the protein and to a decrease in its enzymatic activity. Moreover, the effect of a shock wave with a pressure front rise-time of 80 ns on the increase in the HRP aggregation is demonstrated. The results obtained herein can be of use in modeling the impact of electromagnetic and pressure pulses on enzymes and on whole living organisms. Our results are also important for taking into account the effect of pulsed fields on the body in the development of drugs, therapeutic procedures, and novel highly sensitive medical diagnosticums.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. М. Lobanov ◽  
М. О. Pashchin ◽  
О. L. Mikhodui ◽  
О. V. Cherkashyn ◽  
І. P. Kondratenko

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 767-779
Author(s):  
Yucong Li ◽  
Yongkang Yang ◽  
Ming Wang ◽  
Xiaoting Zhang ◽  
Shanshan Bai ◽  
...  

Aims Distraction osteogenesis (DO) is a useful orthopaedic procedure employed to lengthen and reshape bones by stimulating bone formation through controlled slow stretching force. Despite its promising applications, difficulties are still encountered. Our previous study demonstrated that pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) treatment significantly enhances bone mineralization and neovascularization, suggesting its potential application. The current study compared a new, high slew rate (HSR) PEMF signal, with different treatment durations, with the standard Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved signal, to determine if HSR PEMF is a better alternative for bone formation augmentation. Methods The effects of a HSR PEMF signal with three daily treatment durations (0.5, one, and three hours/day) were investigated in an established rat DO model with comparison of an FDA-approved classic signal (three hrs/day). PEMF treatments were applied to the rats daily for 35 days, starting from the distraction phase until termination. Radiography, micro-CT (μCT), biomechanical tests, and histological examinations were employed to evaluate the quality of bone formation. Results All rats tolerated the treatment well and no obvious adverse effects were found. By comparison, the HSR signal (three hrs/day) treatment group achieved the best healing outcome, in that endochondral ossification and bone consolidation were enhanced. In addition, HSR signal treatment (one one hr/day) had similar effects to treatment using the classic signal (three three hrs/day), indicating that treatment duration could be significantly shortened with the HSR signal. Conclusion HSR signal may significantly enhance bone formation and shorten daily treatment duration in DO, making it a potential candidate for a new clinical protocol for patients undergoing DO treatments. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(12):767–779.


Author(s):  
Penpun Wattanakrai ◽  
Nattawan Limpjaroenviriyakul ◽  
Darin Thongtan ◽  
Rujira Wattanayingcharoenchai ◽  
Jittima Manonai

Abstract Non-invasive vaginal rejuvenation with radiofrequency (RF) and lasers devices have gained popularity, but well-designed studies confirming their effectiveness are lacking. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a multipolar RF and pulsed electromagnetic field-based device (PEMF) versus sham for vaginal laxity. Thirty-two premenopausal females with ≥ 1 vaginal delivery and self-reported vaginal laxity were randomized into 2 groups: active (RF + PEMF) and sham. Both groups received 3 vaginal treatments at 3-week interval. The Vaginal Laxity Questionnaire (VLQ), perineometer measurements, and Brink score were conducted at baseline, 4, and 12 weeks after treatments. Pre and post-treatment vaginal histology, Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI), subjects’ satisfaction, pain, and adverse events were assessed. The active group VLQ scores increased and were significantly better than the sham group (p < 0.001). At the final follow-up, 50% of the active group reported no vaginal laxity (VLQ > 4) versus 12% in the sham group (p = 0.054). In the active group, all domains of perineometer measurements and Brink scores (p < 0.001), FSFI scores (p < 0.05), and patients’ satisfaction (p < 0.001) were significantly increased and higher in the active group. Mild adverse effects including pain and burning sensation were not different between groups except for itch which was significantly higher in the sham arm (p = 0.014). Histology after RF + PEMF treatments demonstrated neocollagenesis, neoelastogenesis, and neoangiogenesis. In conclusion, combination RF + PEMF therapy was safe, improved vaginal laxity, strengthened pelvic floor muscles, and improved female sexual function for at least 12-week post-procedures with confirmed histological improvements. This study was registered on the Thai Clinical Trials Registry, TCTR20200803002 on 2020–07-30 “retrospectively registered.”


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document