Electrical stimulation and low intensity pulsed ultrasound technologies for bone healing may have some beneficial effects on radiographic assessment outcomes (e.g., spinal fusion rate, radiographic nonunion rates, number of days to radiographic healing) and clinical assessment outcomes (e.g., mouth opening, wrist and shoulder mobility, exteroceptive sensation, and wound healing), but may not improve outcomes that are important to patients (e.g., functional recovery). Pain may be reduced by electrical bone growth stimulation devices, but not by low intensity pulsed ultrasound.
No adverse events (AEs) related to the low intensity pulsed ultrasound device were reported. It is unknown if there are AEs related to electrical stimulation devices (no evidence found).
Low intensity pulsed ultrasound for treatment of fresh tibial fractures was not cost-effective compared with placebo from either a payer perspective or societal perspective within the Canadian context.
It is unknown if electrical bone growth stimulator devices are cost-effective (no evidence found).
Varying Willingness to Pay Based on Severity of Illness: Impact on Health Technology Assessment Outcomes of Inpatient and Outpatient Drug Therapies in The Netherlands