Pulsed Electromagnetic Field (PEMF) therapy is gaining recognition for its potential in addressing various health conditions. A recent survey conducted during the ACIM meeting shed light on the diverse perspectives of both individual users and clinicians regarding their experiences with PEMF. This blog will explore the findings, barriers, applications, and perceptions surrounding PEMF therapy.
Barriers to Personal Use:
Individual respondents highlighted two significant barriers to personal PEMF use. Firstly, the cost associated with substantial clinical PEMF systems was deemed excessive, making them financially prohibitive. Additionally, concerns arose from questionable claims pervasive in the PEMF market, impacting the credibility of PEMF technology. The high-pressure sales practices of prominent manufacturers also contributed to reluctance.
Perceived Product Quality:
Perceptions regarding product quality played a significant role, especially among individual users. Due to outdated designs, there was a widespread belief that portable, personal PEMF systems were less effective than larger clinical counterparts. However, the emergence of modern, cost-effective mobile PEMF systems with demonstrated benefits, such as iTorus and pyramids, is expected to reshape these attitudes.
Clinical Users' Perspective:
Clinical users faced challenges in selecting the most beneficial PEMF system due to the need for more clarity on optimal clinical applications and the high investment required for larger systems. The use of PEMF was often considered a "treatment of last resort" for advanced cases, raising questions about the delayed adoption of this potentially beneficial therapy.
Survey Results and Trends:
Common Health Applications: Respondents reported regularly applying PEMF to conditions such as injury recovery, chronic pain, general health, joint injury, arthritis, acute pain, inflammation, self-hacking, and tissue healing and regeneration.
Diverse Applications: The open-ended responses revealed various health conditions to which PEMF is regularly applied, showcasing its versatility.
Adjunctive Modality: PEMF is frequently used adjunctively with an average of 4.3 different modalities, including nutritional supplements, infrared light therapy, chiropractic, massage, and grounding.
Synergistic Effects: A majority (62%) reported "much better" or "somewhat better" results when PEMF was used synergistically with other modalities, challenging the notion of standalone effectiveness.
Safety and Adverse Effects: About 79% had never observed adverse effects from PEMF, and the remaining 21% reported only temporary adverse effects, emphasizing its safety profile.
The survey findings provide valuable insights into the landscape of PEMF therapy. While challenges such as cost, questionable claims, and product quality perceptions exist, the positive experiences reported by users, both individual and clinical, underscore the potential of PEMF across a spectrum of health conditions. As the field evolves, addressing barriers and promoting informed usage could pave the way for broader acceptance of PEMF as an early intervention rather than a treatment of last resort. The continuous exploration of its applications and synergies with other modalities holds promise for the future of PEMF therapy.
Reference:
https://www.josam.org/josam/article/view/69#title-6
