| Purpose. The purpose was to determine the efficacy of electromagnetic bone growth stimulators on healing delayed and non-union fractures.;Methods. All eligible studies from MEDLINE and CENTRAL were compiled and reviewed by two reviewers. Inclusion criteria included any randomized controlled or controlled clinical trial comparing a bone growth stimulator to a sham control. All disagreements between the two primary reviewers were adjudicated by a third reviewer. Abstracted data was used to estimate a relative risk.;Results. Only four articles met all inclusion criteria and data was extracted for the meta-analysis. The primary finding of the meta-analysis was a summary random effect risk ratio of 2.62, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.78 to 8.78. The test of homogeneity was highly significant (Chi 2 = 21.91, 3 d.f., p < 0.0001). Out of the four studies, only Barkers's favored the control over treatment (RR = 0.91).;Conclusion. The primary findings from the random effects method conclude that there was no statistically significant evidence that bone growth stimulators promote healing on delayed or non-union fractures. However the secondary analyses using a fixed effect analysis showed a similar but statistically significant effect of bone growth stimulators on healing compared to sham control. Both analyses have significant heterogeneity and a small amount of included studies. |
