Cargando…

Effects of a Concentric Rare-Earth Magnet on Menstrual Cycle Pain: A Parallel Group Randomized Pilot Study

Background Based on prior reports of the use of magnets to treat pain, our goal was to determine if a concentric rare-earth alternating-pole magnet reduced period pain versus a sham-magnet.  Methods Participants were females (N=36, 18 to 35 years) who regularly experienced menstrual period pain ≥ si...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mayrovitz, Harvey, Milo, Brittany, Alexander, Brooke, Mastropasqua, Marisa, Moparthi, Yashaswani
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Cureus 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7894227/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33628670
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.12801
Descripción
Sumario:Background Based on prior reports of the use of magnets to treat pain, our goal was to determine if a concentric rare-earth alternating-pole magnet reduced period pain versus a sham-magnet.  Methods Participants were females (N=36, 18 to 35 years) who regularly experienced menstrual period pain ≥ six on the numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) of 0-10. Subjects were excluded if they took pain medication on the study day or had implanted pacemakers/metallic devices or secondary dysmenorrhea. Participants were randomized to wear a concentric neodymium-iron boron active-magnet (surface-field of 0.4 Tesla) or a sham magnet. The participant and investigator applying the device were blinded to the device used. The device was placed at the abdominal location of the reported greatest pain for 40-minutes, during which time the subject was able to conduct the normal activity. Pain scores were reported prior to device wearing and afterward. Participants with post-treatment NPRS ratings reduced by ≥ 35% from their pretreatment pain ratings were scored as having reduced pain; reductions < 35% were scored as no meaningful pain change. The threshold of 35% was chosen based on a survey of 10 women as to the level of pain reduction they viewed as meaningful to them. Of the 36 women in this pilot study, 19 wore an active-magnet and 17 wore a sham-magnet. Analyses were based on chi-square and Mann-Whitney statistical tests. Results  Pre-treatment pain scores (mean ± SD) were similar for both groups. Magnet-vs-sham pre-treatment scores were, respectively, 7.16 ± 0.85 vs. 6.94 ± 1.20 (p=0.330). Corresponding median values for the magnet (N=19) and sham (N=17) groups respectively were seven pre-treatment and four post-treatment vs. six pre-treatment and six post-treatment. Post-treatment scores for magnet treated subjects (4.16 ± 2.20) were significantly less (p=0.027) than for sham-treated (5.53 ± 1.50). Of the 19 who wore a magnet, 11 experienced meaningful pain-reduction, and eight did not. Of the 17 who wore a sham, three experienced meaningful pain-reduction, and 14 did not. Magnet and sham wearing responses were statistically significant via chi-square analysis (chi-square=6.12, p=0.013). Percentage reduction in pain score was 41.8% ± 31.1% for magnet-treated vs. 20.8% ± 16.1%, for sham-treated (p<0.05). Conclusions Results suggest that short-term wearing of the magnet herein investigated, produces a meaningful menstrual-pain reduction in some women. Thus, further expanded research seems warranted to determine if longer wearing times result in even greater pain reductions.