Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials

Ilyas S. Aleem, Idris Aleem, Nathan Evaniew, Jason W. Busse, Michael J Yaszemski, Arnav Agarwal, Thomas Einhorn, Mohit Bhandari

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Electrical stimulation is a common adjunct used to promote bone healing; its efficacy, however, remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-Analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials to establish the efficacy of electrical stimulation for bone healing. We identified all trials randomizing patients to electrical or sham stimulation for bone healing. Outcomes were pain relief, functional improvement, and radiographic nonunion. Two reviewers assessed eligibility and risk of bias, performed data extraction, and rated the quality of the evidence. Fifteen trials met our inclusion criteria. Moderate quality evidence from 4 trials found that stimulation produced a significant improvement in pain (mean difference (MD) on 100-millimeter visual analogue scale = â '7.7 mm; 95% CI â '13.92 to â '1.43; p = 0.02). Two trials found no difference in functional outcome (MD = â '0.88; 95% CI â '6.63 to 4.87; p = 0.76). Moderate quality evidence from 15 trials found that stimulation reduced radiographic nonunion rates by 35% (95% CI 19% to 47%; number needed to treat = 7; p < 0.01). Patients treated with electrical stimulation as an adjunct for bone healing have less pain and are at reduced risk for radiographic nonunion; functional outcome data are limited and requires increased focus in future trials.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number31724
JournalScientific Reports
Volume6
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 19 2016

Fingerprint

Meta-Analysis
Randomized Controlled Trials
Electric Stimulation
Bone and Bones
Pain
Numbers Needed To Treat
Visual Analog Scale

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General

Cite this

Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing : A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials. / Aleem, Ilyas S.; Aleem, Idris; Evaniew, Nathan; Busse, Jason W.; Yaszemski, Michael J; Agarwal, Arnav; Einhorn, Thomas; Bhandari, Mohit.

In: Scientific Reports, Vol. 6, 31724, 19.08.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Aleem, Ilyas S. ; Aleem, Idris ; Evaniew, Nathan ; Busse, Jason W. ; Yaszemski, Michael J ; Agarwal, Arnav ; Einhorn, Thomas ; Bhandari, Mohit. / Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing : A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials. In: Scientific Reports. 2016 ; Vol. 6.
@article{d95bf53e7c4947ab946deb9c1a2b1870,
title = "Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials",
abstract = "Electrical stimulation is a common adjunct used to promote bone healing; its efficacy, however, remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-Analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials to establish the efficacy of electrical stimulation for bone healing. We identified all trials randomizing patients to electrical or sham stimulation for bone healing. Outcomes were pain relief, functional improvement, and radiographic nonunion. Two reviewers assessed eligibility and risk of bias, performed data extraction, and rated the quality of the evidence. Fifteen trials met our inclusion criteria. Moderate quality evidence from 4 trials found that stimulation produced a significant improvement in pain (mean difference (MD) on 100-millimeter visual analogue scale = {\^a} '7.7 mm; 95{\%} CI {\^a} '13.92 to {\^a} '1.43; p = 0.02). Two trials found no difference in functional outcome (MD = {\^a} '0.88; 95{\%} CI {\^a} '6.63 to 4.87; p = 0.76). Moderate quality evidence from 15 trials found that stimulation reduced radiographic nonunion rates by 35{\%} (95{\%} CI 19{\%} to 47{\%}; number needed to treat = 7; p < 0.01). Patients treated with electrical stimulation as an adjunct for bone healing have less pain and are at reduced risk for radiographic nonunion; functional outcome data are limited and requires increased focus in future trials.",
author = "Aleem, {Ilyas S.} and Idris Aleem and Nathan Evaniew and Busse, {Jason W.} and Yaszemski, {Michael J} and Arnav Agarwal and Thomas Einhorn and Mohit Bhandari",
year = "2016",
month = "8",
day = "19",
doi = "10.1038/srep31724",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
journal = "Scientific Reports",
issn = "2045-2322",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Efficacy of Electrical Stimulators for Bone Healing

T2 - A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Sham-Controlled Trials

AU - Aleem, Ilyas S.

AU - Aleem, Idris

AU - Evaniew, Nathan

AU - Busse, Jason W.

AU - Yaszemski, Michael J

AU - Agarwal, Arnav

AU - Einhorn, Thomas

AU - Bhandari, Mohit

PY - 2016/8/19

Y1 - 2016/8/19

N2 - Electrical stimulation is a common adjunct used to promote bone healing; its efficacy, however, remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-Analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials to establish the efficacy of electrical stimulation for bone healing. We identified all trials randomizing patients to electrical or sham stimulation for bone healing. Outcomes were pain relief, functional improvement, and radiographic nonunion. Two reviewers assessed eligibility and risk of bias, performed data extraction, and rated the quality of the evidence. Fifteen trials met our inclusion criteria. Moderate quality evidence from 4 trials found that stimulation produced a significant improvement in pain (mean difference (MD) on 100-millimeter visual analogue scale = â '7.7 mm; 95% CI â '13.92 to â '1.43; p = 0.02). Two trials found no difference in functional outcome (MD = â '0.88; 95% CI â '6.63 to 4.87; p = 0.76). Moderate quality evidence from 15 trials found that stimulation reduced radiographic nonunion rates by 35% (95% CI 19% to 47%; number needed to treat = 7; p < 0.01). Patients treated with electrical stimulation as an adjunct for bone healing have less pain and are at reduced risk for radiographic nonunion; functional outcome data are limited and requires increased focus in future trials.

AB - Electrical stimulation is a common adjunct used to promote bone healing; its efficacy, however, remains uncertain. We conducted a meta-Analysis of randomized sham-controlled trials to establish the efficacy of electrical stimulation for bone healing. We identified all trials randomizing patients to electrical or sham stimulation for bone healing. Outcomes were pain relief, functional improvement, and radiographic nonunion. Two reviewers assessed eligibility and risk of bias, performed data extraction, and rated the quality of the evidence. Fifteen trials met our inclusion criteria. Moderate quality evidence from 4 trials found that stimulation produced a significant improvement in pain (mean difference (MD) on 100-millimeter visual analogue scale = â '7.7 mm; 95% CI â '13.92 to â '1.43; p = 0.02). Two trials found no difference in functional outcome (MD = â '0.88; 95% CI â '6.63 to 4.87; p = 0.76). Moderate quality evidence from 15 trials found that stimulation reduced radiographic nonunion rates by 35% (95% CI 19% to 47%; number needed to treat = 7; p < 0.01). Patients treated with electrical stimulation as an adjunct for bone healing have less pain and are at reduced risk for radiographic nonunion; functional outcome data are limited and requires increased focus in future trials.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84983336597&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84983336597&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/srep31724

DO - 10.1038/srep31724

M3 - Article

C2 - 27539550

AN - SCOPUS:84983336597

VL - 6

JO - Scientific Reports

JF - Scientific Reports

SN - 2045-2322

M1 - 31724

ER -