維持好身材不分男女也不分季節，尤其隨著年齡的增長，新陳代謝會跟著減速，為了減脂適當的飲控是必要的。
「我也走過這條路，所以我完全理解那種，美食在眼前不能吃的痛苦感覺。」
每次在診間提到 #HIFEM ，很多人都會說，醫師這不是用在尿失禁嗎？
其實，高強度聚焦電磁技術的治療有幾個常見應用：
1.尿失禁
2.產後骨盆修復
3.復健
4.體雕增肌減脂
5.肌肉放鬆
6.緩解急性與慢性疼痛
7.私密處修復
8.性功能障礙治療
2026年5月11日 星期一
【仁醫說】高強度聚焦式電磁場的常見治療應用
2026年4月23日 星期四
PRP及磁波治療到底有沒有效？來看看一位74歲女性接受治療後的X光片變化！
X光片可發現腰椎側彎、滑脫、神經孔狹窄（事實上頸椎也有問題）
在仁醫的建議下
除了接受數次PRP注射治療以外，也同時接受高強度聚焦式磁場(HIFEM)的治療
由於病患因公需時常待在美國
治療的頻率並不固定
最後一次接受PRP注射治療是2025年8月
之後病患就前往美國
直到今年四月才回國
回國的第一件事就是找仁醫報到保養她的脊椎以及其他部位骨關節
（病患亦有肩膀旋轉肌撕裂、膝關節退化的問題，都是由仁醫治療）
病患自述出國這段時間幾乎沒有下背痛，只是腳偶爾會稍微麻一下
仁醫安排她至中山醫院追蹤脊椎X光片
發現跟之前相比的確有明顯進步
除了側彎的幅度明顯較小（圖一）
滑脫、神經孔狹窄的部份也獲得改善（圖二）
病患對治療更具信心
因此繼續接受PRP注射治療
她說她每次看到仁醫既開心又害怕
開心的是她的問題可以獲得解決
害怕的是又要打針（病患很怕打針）😅
因此她每次來都是接受大管PRP注射治療（圖三）
很多人會問：PRP、磁波治療到底有沒有效？
也很多病患想了解：已經退化、受損的結構，有沒有機會「逆轉」、「修復」回來？就算只是一點點？
答案其實很現實——
的確不是每個人都神奇有效
但是在對的醫師、適合的適應症、病患的配合、足夠的治療量
真的會改變疾病的走向
這位74歲的個案
她沒有密集治療
甚至中間還出國大半年
靠著適當的再生治療搭配磁波
X光還是給出了答案：
退化，不是只能一路向下
我們能做的
不只是讓它「慢一點」，甚至「好一點」
這也是仁醫一直在做的事：
用科學的方法，把身體能修的地方，盡量修回來
PRP與磁波治療，不是萬靈丹
但它確實可以讓「原本只能變差的未來」，出現不同的走向
至於怕打針？
她當然很怕😆
但她依舊會回來
因為比起打針
她更清楚一件事：
有些痛，是可以不用忍一輩子的
去年案例分享：
https://uroprolo.blogspot.com/2025/03/ultrasound-guided-prolotherapy-for.html
2023年4月12日 星期三
The application of High-Intensity Focused Electromagnetic Field (HIFEM) in the treatment of urinary incontinence
When we introduced the treatment principle of high-intensity focused electromagnetic field before, we learned that it can not only train muscles but also promote the repair of various connective tissues.
(https://uroprolo.blogspot.com/2023/03/mechanism-and-application-of-high.html)
This time, we will further explore what kind of therapeutic effect will happen if it is applied to the treatment of urinary incontinence.
Below are some representative studies.
Safety and Efficacy of a Non-Invasive High-Intensity Focused Electromagnetic Field (HIFEM) Device for Treatment of Urinary Incontinence and Enhancement of Quality of Life
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31172580/
This study enrolled 75 patients with three types of urinary incontinence (mean age 55.45 years) who had not received any prior urinary incontinence treatment.
The treatment involved high-intensity focused electromagnetic field therapy twice a week for a total of six treatments.
The treatment effectiveness was evaluated by the absorbent pads used per day and the ICIQ-SF questionnaire.
Results:
61 patients (81%) experienced a significant reduction in urinary incontinence symptoms after six treatments. There was a significant improvement in quality of life (ICIQ-SF improvement of 49.93%).
The treatment effect was maintained after a 3-month follow-up period (ICIQ-SF improvement of 64.42%).
The most significant improvement was observed in patients with mixed urinary incontinence (ICIQ-SF improvement of 69.9%).
70% of patients reported decreased number of used pads.
After reading this study, my impression is that if we the treatment effect is so excellent with HIFEM one course only, then the effect can be further enhanced by combining it with mediation and increasing the courses of treatments.
Additionally, it can be observed that even after a 3-month follow-up period, the treatment effect not only persisted but also continued to improve (Note 1).
This suggests that HIFEM does not simply train the muscles (as stopping training would result in either maintenance or regression), but also has a therapeutic effect on tissue repair, leading to sustained improvement even after treatment cessation.
Furthermore, based on past treatment experience and research, self-training of the pelvic floor muscles cannot guarantee the quality and duration of the training.
Patients who wish to achieve therapeutic effects through self-training of the pelvic floor muscle group typically require 12 to 40 weeks of training.
In contrast, HIFEM equipment ensures the quality of each treatment, and the treatment effect was observed within just 3 weeks. The therapeutic benefits of this treatment are evident.
The previous study results inferred that HIFEM has a repairing effect on pelvic floor tissues. So, is there more direct evidence?
Yes, there is.
A Comparative Study on the Effects of High-Intensity Focused Electromagnetic Technology and Electrostimulation for the Treatment of Pelvic Floor Muscles and Urinary Incontinence in Parous Women: Analysis of Posttreatment Data
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31860567/
This study enrolled 95 parous women, divided into three groups:
1. Group 1: 50 urinary incontinence patients receiving 10 sessions of high-intensity focused electromagnetic (HIFEM) therapy (n = 50, HIFEM)
2. Group 2: 25 urinary incontinence patients receiving electrical stimulation therapy (n = 25, electrical stimulation)
3. Group 3: 20 healthy subjects as a control group (no treatment) (n = 20, control group)
Patients underwent examination by 3-dimensional transperienal ultrasound at the baseline and posttreatments.
Levator-urethra gap, anteroposterior diameter, laterolateral diameter of levator hiatus, and hiatal area were measured.
They also completed the Pelvic Floor Disability Index 20 questionnaire and subjective evaluation of intimate health.
Results:
Only Group 1 patients showed significant improvement on ultrasound examination after treatment (decreased anteroposterior diameter, laterolateral diameter, and hiatal area).
Group 1 patients achieved greater improvement in the Pelvic Floor Disability Index questionnaire compared to Group 2 (52% vs. 18%; P < 0.001), and there was a significant reduction in patients with urinary leakage after treatment.
My personal impression is that most studies on urinary incontinence focus on subjective questionnaire surveys, with pad usage as a secondary objective (also often assessed by questionnaire).
This study is one of the few urinary incontinence treatment-related studies that evaluate treatment effects based on both subjective (questionnaire survey) and objective examination (3D transperineal ultrasound) methods.
Furthermore, not only tissue repair but also muscle contractility can be objectively confirmed (by electromyography), proving the effectiveness on the pelvic floor muscles training.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32146133/
Final question.
How long does the effect of high-intensity electromagneticfield therapy last?
Currently, there is a lack of studies with longer follow-up.
According to studies from traditional magnetic stimulation machines (Note 2), even after one year, the therapeutic effect can still be maintained.
Moreover, the more treatment sessions, the better the effect.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27871927/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28791447/
Summay:
High-intensity focused electromagnetic field treatment of urinary incontinence has the following advantages
1. Non-invasive (better than surgery)
2. No side effects (better than drugs)
3. The curative effect is fast and effective (better than self-training and traditional magnetic stimulation chair)
4. Helps tissue repair, long-lasting effect (better than other treatment methods like electrotherapy, surgery, drugs)
5. Improves quality of life
Certainly, this does not mean that other treatment modalities should be discarded.
Every treatment has a role.
Clinically, different treatment methods are often combined at the same time to achieve the best therapeutic effect.
Therefore, patients with urinary incontinence problems should still seek professional medical assistance to receive appropriate treatment recommendations and prescriptions.
#Emsella
#SIS(super inductive system)
Other references：
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34768730/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35447699/
(Note 1: The average ICIQ-SF score of the patients was 10.57 ± 4.22, which decreased to 5.33 ± 3.97 after six treatments, and further decreased to 4.16 ± 4.04 points in the 3-month follow-up. After six treatments, 13 patients had ICIQ -SF score decreased to 0 points, and the number of patients who decreased to 0 points after 3 months of follow-up increased to 21.
At the beginning of the study, 43 patients used one or more pads per day, with an average of 2.47 ± 2.25 pads per day. After the sixth treatment, a significant improvement of 43.80% (P < 0.001) was observed, with the average number of pads used reduced to 1.35 ± 1.74 per day.
Fifteen (34.88%) of these patients reported that they no longer used the pads, and at 3 months, this had increased to 19 (44.19%) patients. )
(Note 2:
Magnetic stimulation has been used to treat urinary incontinence for many years.
There are also machine models and treatments covered by National Health Insurance in Taiwan.
However. the magnetic field strength generated by the instrument is much weaker than HIFEM and lacks focusing technology.
The difference can be clearly felt when receiving treatment.)