Effects Of Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation Research Articles

Effect of Peripheral Magnetic Stimulation for Dysphagia Rehabilitation: A Systematic Review.

Recently, a therapeutic method to stimulate the suprahyoid muscle using peripheral magnetic stimulation for dysphagia rehabilitation has been reported. However, clinical evidence, application protocol, and intervention method remain unclear. Therefore, a systematic review of the published literature is needed. The objective of this study was to systematically review clinical studies of peripheral magnetic stimulation applied for rehabilitation of dysphagia. Issues to be considered in future studies are also suggested. This systematic review performed a literature search of four databases (Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science) to identify relevant studies published on the application of repetitive peripheral magnetic stimulation (rPMS) for swallowing-related muscles between 2010 and 2022. Seven studies were reviewed. Randomized controlled trials and one-group pre–post, case study designs were included. In the included studies, rPMS was applied to strengthen the submental suprahyoid muscles. The intervention regime varied. The rPMS was applied at a frequency of 30 Hz for 2 s. Rest time ranged from 8 s to 27–28 s. The number of intervention sessions ranged from 2–3 to 30. The intensity ranged from pain-inducing minimum intensity (90% of maximum stimulus output) to non-painful intensity (70–80% of maximum intensity). The rPMS on the suprahyoid muscles had positive effects on physiological changes in the swallowing function, such as displacement of the hyoid bone, muscle strength (cervical flexor, jaw-opening force), swallowing safety, swallowing performance, and swallowing-related quality of life. Participants also reported little pain and adverse reactions during rPMS. Although rPMS is a therapeutic option that can help improve the swallowing function as a non-invasive stimulation method in the rehabilitation of dysphagia, clinical evidence is needed for the development of clear stimulation protocols and guidelines.

The curative effects of magnetic versus electrical stimulation in treating pharyngeal dysphagia

Objective To compare the curative effect of peripheral magnetic stimulation (PMS) with that of neuromuscular electrical stimulation therapy (NMES) for stroke survivors with pharyngeal dysphagia. Methods Sixty stroke survivors were randomly divided into a PMS group, an NMES group and a control group, each of 20. In addition to routine swallowing training, the patients in the PMS and NMES groups were provided with PMS and NMES of the suprahyoid muscles respectively twice a day, six days a week for 4 weeks. Before and after the treatment, all were evaluated using a standardized swallowing assessment (SSA), the functional oral intake scale (FOIS) and videofluoroscopic swallowing study (VFSS). Results Before the intervention there was no significant difference among the three groups in terms of any of the measurements. After the treatment, significant improvement was observed in all of the values in all three groups compared to before the treatment. The average SSA, FOIS and VFSS results of the PMS and NMES groups as reflected by scores on the penetration-aspiration scale and a videofluoroscopic dysphagia scale had improved significantly more than in the control group. And the PMS group had improved significantly more than the NMES group. Conclusion Peripheral magnetic stimulation is more effective than NMES therapy in treating stroke patients with pharyngeal dysphagia. Key words: Peripheral magnetic stimulation; Neuromuscular electrical stimulation; Pharyngeal dysphagia; Stroke

Modulation of motor cortex excitability by peripheral magnetic stimulation of different stimulus sites and frequencies.

Peripheral stimulation is known to influence the state of cortical excitability. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether peripheral magnetic stimulation has similar effects on cortical excitability to transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS). A magnetic stimulator with a flat figure-of-eight coil was used for both TMS, and peripheral magnetic stimulation applied to the bilateral forearms. TMS was performed on the left primary motor cortex to evaluate influence of the peripheral magnetic stimulation, and motor evoked potential (MEP) was measured from the right first dorsal interosseous. Peripheral magnetic stimulation was performed at a stimulus frequency of 1 Hz or 10 Hz, to the stimulus sites on the right and left supination of the forearm. The effects of peripheral magnetic stimulation were evaluated by comparing the mean MEP amplitude elicited by TMS before and after peripheral magnetic stimulation. We found that cortical excitability varied according to the stimulation site and frequency of the peripheral magnetic stimulation. The inhibition of cortical excitability was observed following 1 Hz peripheral magnetic stimulation over the right forearm (p<;0.001). In contrast, increased cortical excitability was observed using 1 Hz peripheral magnetic stimulation over the left forearm and 10 Hz stimulation over either the right or left forearms. We suggest that peripheral magnetic stimulation has a similar effect to TMS, and can induce both facilitation and inhibition of cortical excitability.

Therapeutic effects of peripheral magnetic stimulation on traumatic brachial plexopathy: Clinical and neurophysiological study

To evaluate the therapeutic effects of peripheral repetitive magnetic stimulation (rMS) on recovery of traumatic brachial plexopathy. Thirty-four patients with traumatic brachial plexopathy were studied. Strength of different muscles of upper limbs was evaluated neurologically. Nerve conduction studies (NCS), upper limb F-waves and visual analogue scales (VAS) for shoulder pain were obtained for all patients. These were randomly assigned into two groups with a ratio of 2:1; each patient received conventional physical therapy modalities and active exercises as well as real or sham rMS applied over the superior trapezius muscle of the affected limb daily for 10 sessions. Patients were reassessed with the same parameters after the 5th and the 10th session, and 1 month after rMS treatment. No significant between-group differences were recorded at baseline assessment. Significant improvement was observed (time X groups) after real rMS in comparison to the sham group (P=0.0001 for muscle strength and 0.01 for VAS of shoulder pain). These improvements were still present at 1 month after the end of treatment. In accordance with the clinical improvement, a significant improvement was recorded in the neurophysiological parameters in the real vs the sham group. We demonstrate that peripheral rMS for 10 sessions may have positive therapeutic effects on motor recovery and pain relief in patients with traumatic brachial plexopathy. Therefore, it is a useful adjuvant in the therapy of these patients.