Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T15:01:05.139Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A randomised, placebo-controlled trial of transcranial pulsed electromagnetic fields in patients with multiple chemical sensitivity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2016

Marie Thi Dao Tran ,
Sine Skovbjerg ,
Lars Arendt-Nielsen ,
Karl Bang Christensen  and
Jesper Elberling
Marie Thi Dao Tran*
Affiliation:
Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Hellerup, Denmark
Sine Skovbjerg
Affiliation:
Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Hellerup, Denmark
Lars Arendt-Nielsen
Affiliation:
Department of Health Science and Technology, Center for Sensory-Motor Interaction, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
Karl Bang Christensen
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health, Section of Biostatistics, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen K, Denmark
Jesper Elberling
Affiliation:
Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Hellerup, Denmark
*
Marie Thi Dao Tran, Department of Dermato-Allergology, Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Kildegårdsvej 28, Opgang 8, DK-2900, Hellerup, Denmark. Tel: +45 38677300; Fax: +45 39777118; E-mail address: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy of transcranially applied pulsed electromagnetic fields (PEMF) on functional impairments and symptom severity in multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) patients.

Methods

The study was conducted as a nationwide trial in Denmark using a randomised, parallel-group, double-blind and placebo-controlled design. Sample size was estimated at 40 participants. Eligibility criteria were age 18–75 years and fulfilment of the MCS case criteria. Participants received either PEMF or placebo PEMF (no stimulation) applied transcranially for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the Life Impact Scale (LIS) of the Quick Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory (QEESI). Secondary outcomes were the Symptom Severity Scale (SSS) and the Chemical Intolerance Scale of QEESI.

Results

A total of 39 participants were randomised to PEMF or placebo treatment. No significant difference was observed on QEESI LIS between groups with a mean change score of −5.9 in the PEMF group compared with −1.5 in the placebo group (p=0.35, effect size=−0.31). However, a significant decrease was detected on QEESI SSS within and between groups with a mean change score of −11.3 in the PEMF group compared with −3.2 in the placebo group (p=0.03, effect size=−0.60).

Conclusion

PEMF treatment of 6 weeks showed no effect on functional impairments in MCS. However, a significant decrease in symptom severity was observed.

Keywords

capsaicinmultiple chemical sensitivitypulsed electromagnetic fieldsrandomised trialtreatment
Type
Original Articles
Information
Acta Neuropsychiatrica , Volume 29 , Issue 5 , October 2017 , pp. 267 - 277
Check for updates
Copyright
© Scandinavian College of Neuropsychopharmacology 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. A 1999 consensus. Arch Environ Health 1999;54:147–149.Google Scholar
2. Berg, ND, Linneberg, A, Dirksen, A, Elberling, J. Prevalence of self-reported symptoms and consequences related to inhalation of airborne chemicals in a Danish general population. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2008;81:881–887.Google Scholar
3. Cullen, MR. The worker with multiple chemical sensitivities: an overview. Occup Med 1987;2:655–661.Google Scholar
4. Graveling, RA, Pilkington, A, George, JP, Butler, MP, Tannahill, SN. A review of multiple chemical sensitivity. Occup Environ Med 1999;56:73–85.Google Scholar
5. Rainville, P, Bushnell, MC, Duncan, GH. Representation of acute and persistent pain in the human CNS: potential implications for chemical intolerance. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2001;933:130–141.Google Scholar
6. Sorg, BA, Newlin, DB. Sensitization as a mechanism for multiple chemical sensitivity: relationship to evolutionary theory. Scand J Psychol 2002;43:161–167.Google Scholar
7. Yunus, MB. Fibromyalgia and overlapping disorders: the unifying concept of central sensitivity syndromes. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2007;36:339–356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8. Loeser, JD, Treede, RD. The Kyoto protocol of IASP basic pain terminology. Pain 2008;137:473–477.Google Scholar
9. Hillert, L, Musabasic, V, Berglund, H, Ciumas, C, Savic, I. Odor processing in multiple chemical sensitivity. Hum Brain Mapp 2007;28:172–182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10. Orriols, R, Costa, R, Cuberas, G, Jacas, C, Castell, J, Sunyer, J. Brain dysfunction in multiple chemical sensitivity. J Neurol Sci 2009;287:72–78.Google Scholar
11. Soudry, Y, Lemogne, C, Malinvaud, D, Consoli, SM, Bonfils, P. Olfactory system and emotion: common substrates. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis 2011;128:18–23.Google Scholar
12. Hillert, L, Jovanovic, H, Ahs, F, Savic, I. Women with multiple chemical sensitivity have increased harm avoidance and reduced 5-HT(1A) receptor binding potential in the anterior cingulate and amygdala. PLoS One 2013;8:e54781.Google Scholar
13. Caccappolo-van, VE, Kelly-McNeil, K, Natelson, B, Kipen, H, Fiedler, N. Anxiety sensitivity and depression in multiple chemical sensitivities and asthma. J Occup Environ Med 2002;44:890–901.Google Scholar
14. Fiedler, N, Kipen, HM, DeLuca, J, Kelly-McNeil, K, Natelson, B. A controlled comparison of multiple chemical sensitivities and chronic fatigue syndrome. Psychosom Med 1996;58:38–49.Google Scholar
15. Holst, H, Arendt-Nielsen, L, Mosbech, H, Elberling, J. Increased capsaicin-induced secondary hyperalgesia in patients with multiple chemical sensitivity. Clin J Pain 2011;27:156–162.Google Scholar
16. Tran, MT, Arendt-Nielsen, L, Kupers, R, Elberling, J. Multiple chemical sensitivity: on the scent of central sensitization. Int J Hyg Environ Health 2013;216:202–210.Google Scholar
17. Sampalli, T, Berlasso, E, Fox, R, Petter, M. A controlled study of the effect of a mindfulness-based stress reduction technique in women with multiple chemical sensitivity, chronic fatigue syndrome, and fibromyalgia. J Multidiscip Healthc 2009;2:53–59.Google Scholar
18. Skovbjerg, S, Hauge, CR, Rasmussen, A, Winkel, P, Elberling, J. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy to treat multiple chemical sensitivities: a randomized pilot trial. Scand J Psychol 2012;53:233–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Elberling, J, Gulmann, N, Rasmussen, A. Electroconvulsive therapy substantially reduces symptom severity and social disability associated with multiple chemical sensitivity: a case report. J ECT 2010;26:231–233.Google Scholar
20. Andine, P, Ronnback, L, Jarvholm, B. Successful use of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor in a patient with multiple chemical sensitivities. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1997;96:82–83.Google Scholar
21. Stenn, P, Binkley, K. Successful outcome in a patient with chemical sensitivity. Treatment with psychological desensitization and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. Psychosomatics 1998;39:547–550.Google Scholar
22. Bech, P, Gefke, M, Lunde, M, Lauritzen, L, Martiny, K. The pharmacopsychometric triangle to illustrate the effectiveness of T-PEMF concomitant with antidepressants in treatment resistant patients: a double-blind, randomised, sham-controlled trial revisited with focus on the patient-reported outcomes. Depress Res Treat 2011;2011:806298.Google Scholar
23. Martiny, K, Lunde, M, Bech, P. Transcranial low voltage pulsed electromagnetic fields in patients with treatment-resistant depression. Biol Psychiatry 2010;68:163–169.Google Scholar
24. Tran, MTD, Skovbjerg, S, Arendt-Nielsen, L, Bech, P, Lunde, M, Elberling, J. Two of three patients with multiple chemical sensitivity had less symptoms and secondary hyperalgesia after transcranially applied pulsed electromagnetic fields. Scand J Pain 2014;5:104–109.Google Scholar
25. Tran, MT, Skovbjerg, S, Arendt-Nielsen, L, Christensen, KB, Elberling, J. Transcranial pulsed electromagnetic fields for multiple chemical sensitivity: study protocol for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Trials 2013;14:256.Google Scholar
26. Lacour, M, Zunder, T, Schmidtke, K, Vaith, P, Scheidt, C. Multiple chemical sensitivity syndrome (MCS) – suggestions for an extension of the U.S. MCS-case definition. Int J Hyg Environ Health 2005;208:141–151.Google Scholar
27. Skovbjerg, S, Berg, ND, Elberling, J, Christensen, KB. Evaluation of the quick environmental exposure and sensitivity inventory in a Danish population. J Environ Public Health 2012;2012:304314.Google Scholar
28. Sheehan, DV, Harnett-Sheehan, K, Raj, BA. The measurement of disability. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 1996;11(Suppl. 3):89–95.Google Scholar
29. Arbuckle, R, Frye, MA, Brecher, M et al. The psychometric validation of the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) in patients with bipolar disorder. Psychiatry Res 2009;165:163–174.Google Scholar
30. Olsen, LR, Mortensen, EL, Bech, P. The SCL-90 and SCL-90R versions validated by item response models in a Danish community sample. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2004;110:225–229.Google Scholar
31. Olsen, LR, Mortensen, EL, Bech, P. Mental distress in the Danish general population. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2006;113:477–484.Google Scholar
32. Bech, P. Social functioning: should it become an endpoint in trials of antidepressants? CNS Drugs 2005;19:313–324.Google Scholar
33. Kirsch, I, Deacon, BJ, Huedo-Medina, TB, Scoboria, A, Moore, TJ, Johnson, BT. Initial severity and antidepressant benefits: a meta-analysis of data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. PLoS Med 2008;5:e45.Google Scholar
34. Turner, EH, Matthews, AM, Linardatos, E, Tell, RA, Rosenthal, R. Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N Engl J Med 2008;358:252–260.Google Scholar
35. Straasoe, B, Lauritzen, L, Lunde, M et al. Dose-remission of pulsating electromagnetic fields as augmentation in therapy-resistant depression: a randomized, double-blind controlled study. Acta Neuropsychiatr 2014;26:272–279.Google Scholar
36. Rahbek, UL, Tritsaris, K, Dissing, S. Interactions of low-frequency, pulsed electromagnetic fields with living tissue: biochemical responses and clinical results. Oral Biosciences and Medicine 2005;2:29–40.Google Scholar
37. Lanzenberger, R, Baldinger, P, Hahn, A et al. Global decrease of serotonin-1A receptor binding after electroconvulsive therapy in major depression measured by PET. Mol Psychiatry 2013;18:93–100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38. Saijo, T, Takano, A, Suhara, T et al. Electroconvulsive therapy decreases dopamine D(2)receptor binding in the anterior cingulate in patients with depression: a controlled study using positron emission tomography with radioligand [(1)(1)C]FLB 457. J Clin Psychiatry 2010;71:793–799.Google Scholar
39. Yatham, LN, Liddle, PF, Lam, RW et al. Effect of electroconvulsive therapy on brain 5-HT(2) receptors in major depression. Br J Psychiatry 2010;196:474–479.Google Scholar
40. Chemel, BR, Roth, BL, Armbruster, B, Watts, VJ, Nichols, DE. WAY-100635 is a potent dopamine D4 receptor agonist. Psychopharmacology (Berl) 2006;188:244–251.Google Scholar