Pulsed electromagnetic fields may be effective for the management of primary osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis
ABSTRACT Objective To investigate the effectiveness of pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs) for the management of primary osteoporosis in older adults.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data Sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL and CCTR, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, CNKI, VIP, Wan Fang,<jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://ClinicalTrials.gov">ClinicalTrials.gov</jats:ext-link>and Current controlled trials from the inception dates to April 30, 2021.Eligibility criteria for study selection Randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised trials examining the effects of PEMFs compared to placebo or sham or other agents for the management of primary osteoporosis (including those with previous fractures).Data extraction and synthesis Two independent reviewers extracted data. Primary outcomes were bone mass and number of incident fractures. Secondary outcomes were functional assessments, quality of life, and adverse events. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and certainty of evidence with the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) framework. A random effects model was used to calculate mean differences and 95% confidence intervals.Results Eight trials including 396 participants met the inclusion criteria. Low certainty evidence showed that PEMFs was non-inferior to conventional pharmacological agents in preventing the decline of Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at the lumbar (MD 0.01; CI -0.04 to 0.06) and femur neck (MD 0.01; CI -0.02 to 0.04), and improving balance function measured by Berg Balance Scale (BBS) (MD 0.01; CI -0.09 to 0.11) and Timed Up and Go test (MD -0.04; CI -0.80 to 0.72), directly after intervention. The similar effects were observed in BMD and BBS at 12- and 24-weeks follow-up from baseline with moderate certainty evidence. Very low certainty evidence showed that PEMFs (versus exercise) had small but significant effect on BMD at the femur neck (MD 0.10; CI 0.01 to 0.20), and no effect on BMD at the lumbar (MD 0.15; CI -0.04 to 0.35).Conclusion PEMFs had positive effects non-inferior to first-line treatment on BMD and balance function in older adults with primary osteoporosis, but with low to very low certainty evidence and short-term follow-ups. There is a need for high-quality randomised controlled trials evaluating PEMFs for the management of primary osteoporosis.Registration PROSPERO CRD42018099518..
| Medienart: |
|
|---|
Preprint| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2023 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2023 |
| Enthalten in: |
bioRxiv.org - (2023) vom: 04. Nov. Zur Gesamtaufnahme - year:2023 |
|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Zhu, Siyi [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1101/2021.05.30.21258065 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
XBI031901956 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | XBI031901956 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20231205150340.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 210604s2023 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1101/2021.05.30.21258065 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)XBI031901956 | ||
| 035 | |a (biorXiv)10.1101/2021.05.30.21258065 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Zhu, Siyi |e verfasserin |0 (orcid)0000-0001-8213-7622 |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Pulsed electromagnetic fields may be effective for the management of primary osteoporosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2023 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a ABSTRACT Objective To investigate the effectiveness of pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMFs) for the management of primary osteoporosis in older adults.Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.Data Sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL and CCTR, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, CNKI, VIP, Wan Fang,<jats:ext-link xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://ClinicalTrials.gov">ClinicalTrials.gov</jats:ext-link>and Current controlled trials from the inception dates to April 30, 2021.Eligibility criteria for study selection Randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised trials examining the effects of PEMFs compared to placebo or sham or other agents for the management of primary osteoporosis (including those with previous fractures).Data extraction and synthesis Two independent reviewers extracted data. Primary outcomes were bone mass and number of incident fractures. Secondary outcomes were functional assessments, quality of life, and adverse events. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool and certainty of evidence with the grading of recommendations assessment, development and evaluation (GRADE) framework. A random effects model was used to calculate mean differences and 95% confidence intervals.Results Eight trials including 396 participants met the inclusion criteria. Low certainty evidence showed that PEMFs was non-inferior to conventional pharmacological agents in preventing the decline of Bone Mineral Density (BMD) at the lumbar (MD 0.01; CI -0.04 to 0.06) and femur neck (MD 0.01; CI -0.02 to 0.04), and improving balance function measured by Berg Balance Scale (BBS) (MD 0.01; CI -0.09 to 0.11) and Timed Up and Go test (MD -0.04; CI -0.80 to 0.72), directly after intervention. The similar effects were observed in BMD and BBS at 12- and 24-weeks follow-up from baseline with moderate certainty evidence. Very low certainty evidence showed that PEMFs (versus exercise) had small but significant effect on BMD at the femur neck (MD 0.10; CI 0.01 to 0.20), and no effect on BMD at the lumbar (MD 0.15; CI -0.04 to 0.35).Conclusion PEMFs had positive effects non-inferior to first-line treatment on BMD and balance function in older adults with primary osteoporosis, but with low to very low certainty evidence and short-term follow-ups. There is a need for high-quality randomised controlled trials evaluating PEMFs for the management of primary osteoporosis.Registration PROSPERO CRD42018099518. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Biology |7 (dpeaa)DE-84 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a 570 |7 (dpeaa)DE-84 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Li, Yi |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Wang, Liqiong |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Huang, Jinming |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Song, Kangping |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gan, Xinling |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Xiang, Xiaona |0 (orcid)0000-0001-8659-1080 |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a He, Chengqi |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Yang, Lin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t bioRxiv.org |g (2023) vom: 04. Nov. |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2023 |g day:04 |g month:11 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1109/TNSRE.2022.3149483 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2021.05.30.21258065 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_XBI | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |j 2023 |b 04 |c 11 | ||