Effect of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy on experimental pain: A double-blind, randomized study in healthy young adults

ABSTRACT

Previous studies suggested that pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy can decrease pain. To date, however, it remains difficult to determine whether the analgesic effect observed in patients are attributable to a direct effect of PEMF on pain or to an indirect effect of PEMF on inflammation and healing. In the present study, we used an experimental pain paradigm to evaluate the direct effect of PEMF on pain intensity, pain unpleasantness, and temporal summation of pain. Twenty-four healthy subjects (mean age 22 ± 2 years; 9 males) participated in the experiment. Both real and sham PEMF were administered to every participant using a randomized, double-blind, cross-over design. For each visit, PEMF was applied for 10 minutes on the right forearm using a portable device. Experimental pain was evoked before (baseline) and after PEMF with a 9 cm² Pelletier-type thermode, applied on the right forearm (120 s stimulation; temperature individually adjusted to produce moderate baseline pain). Pain intensity and unpleasantness were evaluated using a 0–100 numerical pain rating scale. Temporal summation was evaluated by comparing pain intensity ratings obtained at the end of tonic nociceptive stimulation (120 s) with pain intensity ratings obtained after 60 s of stimulation. When compared to baseline, there was no change in pain intensity and unpleasantness following the application of real or sham PEMF. PEMF did not affect temporal summation. The present observations suggest that PEMF does not directly influence heat pain perception in healthy individuals.

KEYWORDS:

• Experimental pain
• pain
• physical therapy
• pulsed electromagnetic field therapy
• rehabilitation
• temporal summation
• thermode

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article. PG, HC, and GL are supported by FRQ-S (Quebec). GL and PG are supported by NSERC (Canada).

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Alex Belletete, Amelyse Couture, and Mathieu Hamel for their help with data collection and interpretation.