Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 13, 2026

Treating Low Back Pain in Failed Back Surgery Patients with Multicolumn-lead Spinal Cord Stimulation
Published on: June 26, 2018
Bipolar permanent magnets for the treatment of chronic low back pain: a pilot study
E A Collacott1, J T Zimmerman, D W White
1Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Prescott, Ariz 86313, USA. edward.collacott@med.va.gov
Context:
Chronic low back pain is one of the most prevalent and costly medical conditions in the United States. Permanent magnets have become a popular treatment for various musculoskeletal conditions, including low back pain, despite little scientific support for therapeutic benefit.
Objective:
To compare the effectiveness of 1 type of therapeutic magnet, a bipolar permanent magnet, with a matching placebo device for patients with chronic low back pain.
Design:
Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover pilot study conducted from February 1998 to May 1999.
Setting:
An ambulatory care physical medicine and rehabilitation clinic at a Veterans Affairs hospital.
Patients:
Nineteen men and 1 woman with stable low back pain of a mean of 19 years' duration, with no past use of magnet therapy for low back pain. Twenty patients were determined to provide 80% power in the study at P<.05 to detect a difference of 2 points (the difference believed to be clinically significant) on a visual analog scale (VAS).
Interventions:
For each patient, real and sham bipolar permanent magnets were applied, on alternate weeks, for 6 hours per day, 3 days per week for 1 week, with a 1-week washout period between the 2 treatment weeks.
Main Outcome Measures:
Pretreatment and posttreatment pain intensity on a VAS; sensory and affective components of pain on the Pain Rating Index (PRI) of the McGill Pain Questionnaire; and range of motion (ROM) measurements of the lumbosacral spine, compared by real vs sham treatment.
Results:
Mean VAS scores declined by 0.49 (SD, 0.96) points for real magnet treatment and by 0.44 (SD, 1.4) points for sham treatment (P = .90). No statistically significant differences were noted in the effect between real and sham magnets with any of the other outcome measures (ROM, P = .66; PRI, P = .55).
Conclusions:
Application of 1 variety of permanent magnet had no effect on our small group of subjects with chronic low back pain.
More Related Videos
05:10Back Mechanical Sensitivity Assessment in the Rat for Mechanistic Investigation of Chronic Back Pain
Published on: August 30, 2022
06:28Biomechanical Changes Related to Low Back Pain: An Innovative Tool for Movement Pattern Assessment and Treatment Evaluation in Rehabilitation
Published on: December 13, 2024