A Cochrane review [Abstract] 1 included 2 studies with a total of 60 subjects. One was a three-armed study comparing electromagnetic therapy (EMT) with sham electromagnetic therapy in combination with standard therapy, and with standard therapy alone, on 17 female and 13 male with stage II and III pressure ulcers. The other study compared EMT with sham therapy in 30 male participants with a spinal cord injury and a stage II or stage III pressure ulcer.
Neither study found a statistically significant difference between the healing rates of pressure ulcers in people treated with EMT compared with those in the control group. In the first study, 17 out of 20 (85%) ulcers healed in the EMT group within 8 weeks compared with no ulcers healing in either of the other two groups (5 ulcers in each); RR was 10.00, 95% CI 0.70 to 143.06. In the other study, at one week 3 out of 10 (30%) stage II pressure ulcers and 3 out of 5 (60%) stage III pressure ulcers in the EMT group had healed, compared with none in the sham EMT group; pooled RR for stage II and III was 7.00 (95% CI 0.97 to 50.38). One study assessed percentage reduction in wound surface area, and the difference between the two groups was reported to be statistically significant in favour of EMT; reduction at one week was 77% in the EMT group and 40% in the sham EMT group.
Comment: The quality of evidence is downgraded by study quality (unclear allocation concealment), and by imprecise results (few patients and wide confidence intervals).
Primary/Secondary Keywords