Magneto-Therapy in Physiotherapy -- Does it work?

  • Thread starter Thread starter VACUUMIST
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Work
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the efficacy of magneto-therapy in physiotherapy, particularly regarding its use for relieving joint pain and tendinitis. Participants explore evidence, FDA approvals, and the validity of various treatments involving magnetism.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants inquire about the existence of evidence supporting the effectiveness of magneto-therapy in physiotherapy.
  • One participant mentions an FDA-approved treatment involving magnets for obsessive-compulsive disorder but clarifies that they are interested in applications for joint pain and tendinitis.
  • Concerns are raised regarding the FDA's "de novo" submission process, which some participants argue may allow devices to be marketed without sufficient evidence of clinical effectiveness.
  • Another participant expresses skepticism about the validity of magneto-therapy, noting the prevalence of unproven devices and a lack of FDA-approved treatments for the intended uses.
  • References to experimental reports, both supportive and critical, are requested by participants, indicating a desire for empirical evidence.
  • A link to a Wikipedia page on pulsed electromagnetic field therapy is shared, highlighting partial acceptance and legal issues faced by companies regarding FDA advertising rules.
  • One participant mentions an off-label use of magnets for improving healing rates in diabetic patients post-surgery, suggesting some anecdotal support for specific applications.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the effectiveness and validity of magneto-therapy, with no consensus reached on its clinical efficacy or the reliability of FDA approvals related to such treatments.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of empirical evidence presented, the dependence on FDA classification processes, and the unresolved nature of claims regarding the effectiveness of magneto-therapy for specific conditions.

VACUUMIST
Messages
28
Reaction score
3
TL;DR
Does exist proof of succesful benefits?
I would be glad to know if there is evidence of the efficiency of physiotherapy based on magnetism.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
VACUUMIST said:
Summary:: Does exist proof of successful benefits?

I would be glad to know if there is evidence of the efficiency of physiotherapy based on magnetism.
Welcome to PF.

I believe I've seen an FDA approved treatment involving magnets, but I'll have to do a quick search. Which therapies do you have in mind? Can you post links to reputable websites (including the FDA) that have information about the therapies you are asking about?
 
This is the treatment I was thinking of (but it's for treating OCD, not general physiotherapy):

https://www.fda.gov/news-events/pre...ation-treatment-obsessive-compulsive-disorder

1623440556022.png
 
Dear Berkeman

Thnks for your answer.
No intracraneal applications!
Only its use to relieve joint pain or tendinitis.
 
FYI

berkeman said:
I believe I've seen an FDA approved treatment involving magnets, but I'll have to do a quick search.
Please be aware that this device was submitted under a new Trump-era FDA doctrine called "de novo" submission which bypasses most safeguards regarding effectiveness. It also clears the way for marketing the product as part of a 510k submission if I comprehend. It is, of course, a corruption.
https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/cdrh-...matic-class-iii-designation-de-novo-summaries

"Because devices classified under this pathway (De N ovodevices) are low to moderate r isk devices, they may not need to confer a s substantial a b enefit to pa tie nts7in orde r to have a favorable benefit-risk prof ile . Devices granted marke tingauthority under De Novorequests should be suffi ciently understood to explain all the r isks and benefits of the device such that a ll risks can be a ppropriately mitigated through theapplication of general and/or special c ontrols to provide reasonable a ssurance of s afetyand effectivene ss. Fur ther, devices classified under De Novorequests may serve a s predicates f or future devices which can be a ppropriately regulated through the 510(k) pr og ram; therefore, FDA carefully considers the benefit-risk prof ile of these de vices in the de termination that there is reasonable a ssuranc e of s afety and effectivene"

I believe it speaks little to bona-fide clinical effectiveness
 
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: atyy and berkeman
Thanks
I was thinking in some experimental report, pro or con.
 
VACUUMIST said:
Dear Berkeman

Thnks for your answer.
No intracraneal applications!
Only its use to relieve joint pain or tendinitis.
I haven't seen anything valid for that. Lots of woo devices, but nothing with FDA approval (and even that, modulo the clarification by @hutchphd above).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd
thanks to both of you.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: berkeman and hutchphd
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsed_electromagnetic_field_therapy
Partial acceptance, there are links to the published research. The companies involved had legal action taken against them later on for violating FDA rules about advertising.

One off label use is for type II diabetic patients - button magnets for improved healing rates post podiatric surgery for 24 hours using a set of magnets embedded in the dressing.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
7K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K