Search and development of new physiotherapeutic technologies of regenerative medicine for the treatment of patients with different diseases is an urgent task of modern medicine.
OBJECTIVE: To analyze scientific data on the effectiveness of the peripheral magnetic stimulation (PMS) application in patients with different diseases.
METHODS: An analysis of publications in databases of electronic resources (PEDro, PubMed, Embase, eLibrary, Cochrane Library) over the past 20 years was carried out, the results of PMS application in patients with different nosologies were presented.
RESULTS: The majority of the presented articles confirm the clinical effectiveness of PMS application mainly in patients with diseases of the nervous system, spine and genitourinary system.
CONCLUSIONS: Further research to confirm the effectiveness of the therapeutic impact of magnetic stimulation in patients with other nosologies is needed.
Поиск и разработка новых физиотерапевтических технологий восстановительной медицины для лечения пациентов с разными заболеваниями является актуальной задачей современной медицины.
UNASSIGNED: Анализ научных данных об эффективности применения периферической магнитной стимуляции (ПМС) у пациентов с разными заболеваниями.
UNASSIGNED: Был осуществлен анализ публикаций в базах данных электронных ресурсов (PEDro, PubMed, Embase, eLibrary, Кохрейновская библиотека) за последние 20 лет, в которых представлены результаты применения ПМС у пациентов с разными нозологиями.
UNASSIGNED: Большинством представленных работ подтверждена клиническая эффективность применения ПМС в основном у пациентов с заболеваниями нервной системы, позвоночника и мочеполовой системы.
UNASSIGNED: Необходимо продолжение научных исследований с целью подтверждения эффективности лечебного воздействия магнитной стимуляции у пациентов с другими нозологиями.

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.

Peripheral magnetic stimulation (PMS) is a potentially promising modality to help manage postoperative pain. We systematically reviewed the effect of PMS on acute and chronic postoperative pain. MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, ProQuest Dissertations, and clinical trials.gov were searched from inception until May 2021. We included studies of any study design that included patients ≥18 years of age undergoing any type of surgery that administered PMS within the perioperative period and evaluated postoperative pain. Seventeen randomized controlled trials and 1 nonrandomized clinical trial were included into the review. Thirteen out of the 18 studies found a positive effect with PMS on postoperative pain scores. In our meta-analysis, peripheral magnetic stimulation was more efficacious than sham or no intervention within the first 7 postoperative days (mean difference [MD] -1.64 on a 0 to 10 numerical rating score, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.08 to -1.20, I2 = 77%, 6 studies, 231 patients). This was also true at 1 and 2 months after surgery (MD -1.82, 95% CI -2.48 to -1.17, I2 = 0%, 3 studies, 104 patients; and MD -1.96, 95% CI -3.67 to -.26, I2 = 84%, 3 studies, 104 patients, respectively). A difference was not seen with persistent pain at 6 and 12-months after surgery, acute postoperative opioid consumption, or adverse events between groups. Results are limited by heterogeneity and generally low-quality studies, as well as low or very low quality of evidence. High-quality and adequately blinded trials are needed to definitively confirm the benefits of peripheral magnetic stimulation administered in the perioperative period. PERSPECTIVE: This review evaluates the efficacy and safety of PMS on postoperative pain. The results help elucidate PMS\' role in postoperative pain management and identify gaps where more research is required.