Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Evidence-Based Complementary and Alternative Medicine
Volume 2015, Article ID 719082, 11 pages
Review Article

Effects of Whole-Body Vibration Therapy in Patients with Fibromyalgia: A Systematic Literature Review

1Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Extremadura, 10003 Caceres, Spain
2Universidad Autónoma de Chile, 3460000 Talca, Chile
3Department of Sport and Exercise Science, The University of Auckland, Auckland 1142, New Zealand
4Faculty of Sport and Physical Education, University of Évora, 7005-399 Évora, Portugal
5Department of Physical Education and Sport, University of Seville, 41013 Seville, Spain

Received 11 February 2015; Revised 31 March 2015; Accepted 2 April 2015

Academic Editor: Li-Wei Chou

Copyright © 2015 Daniel Collado-Mateo et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


Objective. To review the literature on the effects of whole-body vibration therapy in patients with fibromyalgia. Design. Systematic literature review. Patients. Patients with fibromyalgia. Methods. An electronic search of the literature in four medical databases was performed to identify studies on whole-body vibration therapy that were published up to the 15th of January 2015. Results. Eight articles satisfied the inclusion and exclusion criteria and were analysed. According to the Dutch CBO guidelines, all selected trials had a B level of evidence. The main outcomes that were measured were balance, fatigue, disability index, health-related quality of life, and pain. Whole-body vibration appeared to improve the outcomes, especially balance and disability index. Conclusion. Whole-body vibration could be an adequate treatment for fibromyalgia as a main therapy or added to a physical exercise programme as it could improve balance, disability index, health-related quality of life, fatigue, and pain. However, this conclusion must be treated with caution because the paucity of trials and the marked differences between existing trials in terms of protocol, intervention, and measurement tools hampered the comparison of the trials.