Efficacy of Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy as an Adjunct to Meloxicam and Exercise in Grade II and III Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized, Single-Blind Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Osteoarthritis (OA) represents the most common form of arthritis, particularly among older adults, with knee osteoarthritis (KOA) being a major contributor to pain and disability. Exercise therapy is a core non-pharmacological intervention for managing OA, with proven benefits for pain relief and physical function. Clinical guidelines, such as those issued by European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) and American College of Rheumatology (ACR), recommend strengthening, aerobic, and flexibility exercises for symptom control. Pulsed electromagnetic field (PEMF) therapy is a non-invasive modality with potential regenerative and anti-inflammatory effects. Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the additional benefit of PEMF therapy when combined with meloxicam and structured exercise in participants with grade II and III KOA. Methods: In this single-blind randomized controlled trial, 60 participants with grade II-III KOA were recruited using convenience sampling. The required sample size was calculated a priori using the formula for comparing two independent means, based on a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 1.5 points on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), a standard deviation (SD) of 2.0, α = 0.05, and 80% power, yielding 27 participants per group. Considering a 10% anticipated dropout, 30 participants were assigned to each group. Randomization was performed using a computer-generated sequence, and allocation concealment was ensured through sealed opaque envelopes. The intervention group received PEMF therapy (75 Hz, 50 Gauss, 30 min/session, 3 times/week, 8 sessions), meloxicam (15 mg/day), and exercise, while the control group received sham PEMF plus the same standard care. Primary outcomes were pain (VAS) and function [Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC)], assessed at baseline, post-treatment, 6 weeks, and 3 months. Results: All 60 participants completed the trial with no losses or exclusions. At 3 months, the intervention group demonstrated significantly greater pain reduction [VAS: From 9.13 ± 1.38 to 2.60 ± 1.73; Δ = -6.53, 95% confidence intervals (CI): -7.11 to -5.95; P < 0.001] than the control group (VAS: From 9.33 ± 0.88 to 8.20 ± 1.90). Similarly, WOMAC total scores improved more in the intervention group (from 79.93 ± 13.23 to 20.80 ± 9.76; Δ = -59.13, 95% CI: -63.9 to -54.4; P < 0.001). Effect sizes were large for both pain (η2 = 0.821) and function (η2 = 0.829). Conclusions: The PEMF therapy substantially enhances pain relief and physical function in participants with KOA, with no reported side effects. These findings support its use as a non-invasive adjunct treatment. Further studies with longer follow-up periods are warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".