f magnets on several pain trigger areas, and the possible difference of effect of various sizes and shapes of a magnetized device. Lastly, and probably one of the biggest issue overall, is the issue of whether or not magnetic therapy is cost effective, as opposed to the traditional pharmacological or physical therapy modalities and their effect on pain management (Vallbona, et al. p. 1203).Paul Borsa of Oregon State University did another important study on the effects of magnets. His research contends the use of flexible magnets on pain production. He and his colleagues performed a single blind pilot study using repeated measures. They tested recovery time after the muscle microinjury and pain perception.The experimental group received a 700 G flexible magnet, which was constructed from silicon rubber and high grade steel, and had the properties of a static magnetic field. These magnets were 8 cm by 5 cm and 3 mm thick (slightly larger than those from the Baylor study due to the size of the treated area). Patients wore the magnet after participating in exercise-induced, concentric-eccentric muscle soreness protocol of the biceps brachii, and came to have their pain perception, range of motion, and static force production (the three primary dependent measures) measured after 24, 48, and 72 hours of wearing the device. A visual analog scale (0-10), like that of the Baylor study, assessed pain perception, range of motion was evaluated using a goniometer on elbow flexion and extension, and static force production was measured using an isokinetic testing device (Borsa, pp. 152-153).The results were not statistically significant in pretreatment versus posttreament data. Pain perception, range of motion, and static force production all had a mean p-value of less than 0.05. Borsa and company give a reason for their claim that the results are insignificant; that it is a matter of a lack of thermal effect due to the low strength of the ...
