Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields for Postsurgical Pain Management in Women Undergoing Cesarean Section
article
OA: closed
CC0
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) in relation to reducing postoperative pain, analgesic use, and wound healing in patients undergoing Cesarean section (C-section). METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated 72 women who underwent elective C-section. Thirty-six patients were assigned to the active-PEMF and 36 to the sham-PEMF groups. The participants were asked to report their pain intensity on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS) at 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 hours and 2, 4, and 7 days after surgery. The amount of analgesics used was recorded. The surgical site was evaluated to assess the wound-healing process on the seventh postoperative day. RESULTS: Postoperative pain VAS scores were significantly lower in the active-PEMF group in all the measured periods within the early and the late postoperative periods. Fewer women in the active-PEMF group experienced severe postoperative pain within 24 hours postoperatively (36% vs. 72%, P=0.002). Analgesic use during the first 24 hours after C-section was 1.9-times lower in the active-PEMF group (1.6±0.7 vs. 3.1±1.2, P<0.001). The total analgesic use during the seventh postoperative days was 2.1-times lower in the active-PEMF group than in the sham group (1.7±0.7 vs. 3.7±1.1, P<0.001). Seven days postoperatively, patients in the active-PEMF group had better wound healing with no exudate, erythema, or edema (P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: PEMF treatment after C-section decreases postsurgical pain, analgesic use, and surgical wound exudate and edema significantly, and is associated with a high level of patient satisfaction.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Outcome instruments
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
References (31)
- doi:10.1016/j.jopan.2009.05.095 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.asj.2009.02.001 via openalex
- doi:10.2147/imcrj.s73068 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0165-5728(01)00324-1 via openalex
- W1231422134 via openalex
- doi:10.2165/00128072-200002030-00006 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.neulet.2008.03.052 via openalex
- doi:10.1213/01.ane.0000177100.08599.c8 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.asj.2004.12.001 via openalex
- doi:10.1096/fj.02-0101com via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.brainresrev.2008.12.020 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/0006-8993(94)90960-1 via openalex
- doi:10.1007/s00296-009-1206-y via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.oooo.2014.11.017 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.bbagen.2011.10.001 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2012.08.078 via openalex
- doi:10.2147/jpr.s35076 via openalex
- W2143618573 via openalex
- doi:10.1186/1744-8069-6-55 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.midw.2005.08.005 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0008-6363(99)00408-3 via openalex
- doi:10.1007/s00266-008-9169-z via openalex
- W3048361373 via openalex
- doi:10.1046/j.1471-4159.1999.02206.x via openalex
- W6681116456 via openalex
- W6781510645 via openalex
- W7075584072 via openalex
- doi:10.1111/j.1745-7254.2005.00058.x via openalex
- doi:10.1002/jcb.2400510402 via openalex
- doi:10.1097/prs.0b013e3181c9f6d3 via openalex
- doi:10.1002/jor.20590 via openalex
Source provenance
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-05-14T06:52:15.578221+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK