Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To provide a systematic review of the literature on the effects of peripheral magnetic stimulation (PMS) in the treatment of chronic peripheral neuropathic pain.
METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINHAL, Web of Science, and ProQuest was conducted from inception to July 2023 to identify studies of any design published in English language that enrolled adult patients (≥18 years) that received PMS for treatment of a chronic peripheral neuropathic pain disorder (pain > 3 months).
RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were identified which included 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), five case series, two case reports, and one non-randomized trial. PMS regimens varied across studies and ranged from 5 to 240 min per session over 1 day to 1 year of treatment. Results across included studies were mixed, with some studies suggesting benefits while others showing no significant differences. Of nine placebo-controlled RCTs, four reported statistically significant findings in favor of PMS use. In the meta-analysis, PMS significantly reduced pain scores compared to control within 0-1 month of use (mean difference -1.64 on a 0-10 numeric rating scale, 95% confidence interval -2.73 to -0.56, p = 0.003, I2 = 94%, 7 studies [264 participants], very low quality of evidence), but not at the 1-3 months and >3 months of PMS use (very low and low quality of evidence, respectively). Minimal to no adverse effects were reported with PMS use.
CONCLUSIONS: There is limited and low-quality evidence to make definitive recommendations on PMS usage, however, the available data is encouraging, especially for short-term applications of this novel modality. Large high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to establish definitive efficacy and safety effects of PMS.
METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINHAL, Web of Science, and ProQuest was conducted from inception to July 2023 to identify studies of any design published in English language that enrolled adult patients (≥18 years) that received PMS for treatment of a chronic peripheral neuropathic pain disorder (pain > 3 months).
RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were identified which included 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), five case series, two case reports, and one non-randomized trial. PMS regimens varied across studies and ranged from 5 to 240 min per session over 1 day to 1 year of treatment. Results across included studies were mixed, with some studies suggesting benefits while others showing no significant differences. Of nine placebo-controlled RCTs, four reported statistically significant findings in favor of PMS use. In the meta-analysis, PMS significantly reduced pain scores compared to control within 0-1 month of use (mean difference -1.64 on a 0-10 numeric rating scale, 95% confidence interval -2.73 to -0.56, p = 0.003, I2 = 94%, 7 studies [264 participants], very low quality of evidence), but not at the 1-3 months and >3 months of PMS use (very low and low quality of evidence, respectively). Minimal to no adverse effects were reported with PMS use.
CONCLUSIONS: There is limited and low-quality evidence to make definitive recommendations on PMS usage, however, the available data is encouraging, especially for short-term applications of this novel modality. Large high-quality randomized controlled trials are required to establish definitive efficacy and safety effects of PMS.
摘要：
目的：对外周磁刺激(PMS)治疗慢性外周神经性疼痛的相关文献进行系统综述。
方法：对MEDLINE的系统搜索，EMBASE,中部,CINHAL,WebofScience,和ProQuest从开始至2023年7月进行,以确定任何以英语发表的设计的研究,这些研究纳入了接受PMS治疗慢性周围神经性疼痛障碍(疼痛>3个月)的成年患者(≥18岁).
结果：确定了23项研究，其中包括15项随机对照试验（RCT），五个案例系列，两个病例报告,和一项非随机试验。PMS方案因研究而异，在1天至1年的治疗中，每次5至240分钟。纳入研究的结果参差不齐，一些研究表明有好处，而另一些研究没有显着差异。在九项安慰剂对照随机对照试验中，四个报告了支持PMS使用的统计学显著发现。在荟萃分析中，在使用0-1个月内，与对照组相比，PMS显着降低了疼痛评分（0-10数字评定量表的平均差-1.64，95%置信区间-2.73至-0.56，p=0.003，I2=94%，7项研究[264名参与者]，证据质量非常低)，但不是在1-3个月和>3个月的PMS使用(非常低和低质量的证据，分别)。使用PMS报告的不良反应最少至无。
结论：有有限且低质量的证据可以对PMS的使用提出明确的建议，然而,现有的数据令人鼓舞，特别是这种新颖模式的短期应用。需要大量高质量的随机对照试验来确定PMS的确切疗效和安全性。
方法：对MEDLINE的系统搜索，EMBASE,中部,CINHAL,WebofScience,和ProQuest从开始至2023年7月进行,以确定任何以英语发表的设计的研究,这些研究纳入了接受PMS治疗慢性周围神经性疼痛障碍(疼痛>3个月)的成年患者(≥18岁).
结果：确定了23项研究，其中包括15项随机对照试验（RCT），五个案例系列，两个病例报告,和一项非随机试验。PMS方案因研究而异，在1天至1年的治疗中，每次5至240分钟。纳入研究的结果参差不齐，一些研究表明有好处，而另一些研究没有显着差异。在九项安慰剂对照随机对照试验中，四个报告了支持PMS使用的统计学显著发现。在荟萃分析中，在使用0-1个月内，与对照组相比，PMS显着降低了疼痛评分（0-10数字评定量表的平均差-1.64，95%置信区间-2.73至-0.56，p=0.003，I2=94%，7项研究[264名参与者]，证据质量非常低)，但不是在1-3个月和>3个月的PMS使用(非常低和低质量的证据，分别)。使用PMS报告的不良反应最少至无。
结论：有有限且低质量的证据可以对PMS的使用提出明确的建议，然而,现有的数据令人鼓舞，特别是这种新颖模式的短期应用。需要大量高质量的随机对照试验来确定PMS的确切疗效和安全性。
