Cargando…
Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials
Electrical stimulation is a common adjunct used to promote bone healing; its efficacy, however, remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials to establish the efficacy of electrical stimulation for bone healing. We identified all trials randomizing patients to...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4990885/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27539550 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep31724 |
_version_ | 1782448759264772096 |
---|---|
author | Aleem, Ilyas S. Aleem, Idris Evaniew, Nathan Busse, Jason W. Yaszemski, Michael Agarwal, Arnav Einhorn, Thomas Bhandari, Mohit |
author_facet | Aleem, Ilyas S. Aleem, Idris Evaniew, Nathan Busse, Jason W. Yaszemski, Michael Agarwal, Arnav Einhorn, Thomas Bhandari, Mohit |
author_sort | Aleem, Ilyas S. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Electrical stimulation is a common adjunct used to promote bone healing; its efficacy, however, remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials to establish the efficacy of electrical stimulation for bone healing. We identified all trials randomizing patients to electrical or sham stimulation for bone healing. Outcomes were pain relief, functional improvement, and radiographic nonunion. Two reviewers assessed eligibility and risk of bias, performed data extraction, and rated the quality of the evidence. Fifteen trials met our inclusion criteria. Moderate quality evidence from 4 trials found that stimulation produced a significant improvement in pain (mean difference (MD) on 100-millimeter visual analogue scale = −7.7 mm; 95% CI −13.92 to −1.43; p = 0.02). Two trials found no difference in functional outcome (MD = −0.88; 95% CI −6.63 to 4.87; p = 0.76). Moderate quality evidence from 15 trials found that stimulation reduced radiographic nonunion rates by 35% (95% CI 19% to 47%; number needed to treat = 7; p < 0.01). Patients treated with electrical stimulation as an adjunct for bone healing have less pain and are at reduced risk for radiographic nonunion; functional outcome data are limited and requires increased focus in future trials. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4990885 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-49908852016-08-30 Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials Aleem, Ilyas S. Aleem, Idris Evaniew, Nathan Busse, Jason W. Yaszemski, Michael Agarwal, Arnav Einhorn, Thomas Bhandari, Mohit Sci Rep Article Electrical stimulation is a common adjunct used to promote bone healing; its efficacy, however, remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials to establish the efficacy of electrical stimulation for bone healing. We identified all trials randomizing patients to electrical or sham stimulation for bone healing. Outcomes were pain relief, functional improvement, and radiographic nonunion. Two reviewers assessed eligibility and risk of bias, performed data extraction, and rated the quality of the evidence. Fifteen trials met our inclusion criteria. Moderate quality evidence from 4 trials found that stimulation produced a significant improvement in pain (mean difference (MD) on 100-millimeter visual analogue scale = −7.7 mm; 95% CI −13.92 to −1.43; p = 0.02). Two trials found no difference in functional outcome (MD = −0.88; 95% CI −6.63 to 4.87; p = 0.76). Moderate quality evidence from 15 trials found that stimulation reduced radiographic nonunion rates by 35% (95% CI 19% to 47%; number needed to treat = 7; p < 0.01). Patients treated with electrical stimulation as an adjunct for bone healing have less pain and are at reduced risk for radiographic nonunion; functional outcome data are limited and requires increased focus in future trials. Nature Publishing Group 2016-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC4990885/ /pubmed/27539550 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep31724 Text en Copyright © 2016, The Author(s) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Article Aleem, Ilyas S. Aleem, Idris Evaniew, Nathan Busse, Jason W. Yaszemski, Michael Agarwal, Arnav Einhorn, Thomas Bhandari, Mohit Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials |
title | Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials |
title_full | Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials |
title_fullStr | Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials |
title_short | Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials |
title_sort | efficacy of electrical stimulators for bone healing: a meta-analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4990885/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27539550 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/srep31724 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT aleemilyass efficacyofelectricalstimulatorsforbonehealingametaanalysisofrandomizedshamcontrolledtrials AT aleemidris efficacyofelectricalstimulatorsforbonehealingametaanalysisofrandomizedshamcontrolledtrials AT evaniewnathan efficacyofelectricalstimulatorsforbonehealingametaanalysisofrandomizedshamcontrolledtrials AT bussejasonw efficacyofelectricalstimulatorsforbonehealingametaanalysisofrandomizedshamcontrolledtrials AT yaszemskimichael efficacyofelectricalstimulatorsforbonehealingametaanalysisofrandomizedshamcontrolledtrials AT agarwalarnav efficacyofelectricalstimulatorsforbonehealingametaanalysisofrandomizedshamcontrolledtrials AT einhornthomas efficacyofelectricalstimulatorsforbonehealingametaanalysisofrandomizedshamcontrolledtrials AT bhandarimohit efficacyofelectricalstimulatorsforbonehealingametaanalysisofrandomizedshamcontrolledtrials |