Pulsed ND:YAG laser combined with progressive pressure release in the treatment of cervical myofascial pain syndrome: a randomized control trial

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy in the management of neck pain

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the effects of high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) on pain, disability, and range of movement in patients with neck pain. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of HILT for neck pain disorders were searched across databases such as PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, CINAHL, Science Direct, Cochrane Library, the PEDro database, and Google Scholar (updated January 7, 2024). The main outcome was pain intensity, with neck disability and cervical range of motion as secondary outcomes. Researchers reviewed article titles and abstracts from different databases using the Rayyan web app. Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and evidence-based recommendations were developed using the GRADE approach. A meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the pooled effect in terms of mean differences (MD) for the outcomes of interest, along with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Twenty studies met the selection criteria and were potentially eligible for inclusion in the meta-analysis. At the end of the treatment, there was a statistically significant (p < 0.01) pooled MD of -14.1 mm for pain intensity (17 RCTs) with the VAS (95% CI:-18.4,-9.7), 3.9° (95% CI:1.9,6.7) for cervical extension (9 RCTs), and -8.3% (95% CI:-14.1,-4.1) for disability diminish (12 RCTs) with the neck disability index in favor of HILT. Only the results for pain intensity are in line with the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) reported in the literature. Overall, the evidence was deemed significant but with low certainty, attributed to observed heterogeneity and some risk of bias among the RCTs. HILT demonstrates effectiveness in reducing neck pain and disability while enhancing cervical extension when added to other physical therapy interventions, especially therapeutic exercise, based on a moderate level of evidence. This review highlights that the most favorable results are obtained when HILT is employed to address myofascial pain, cervical radiculopathy and chronic neck pain.PROSPERO registration number: CRD42023387394 (Registration date, 14/01/2023).

Comparative effectiveness of noninvasive therapeutic interventions for myofascial pain syndrome: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) has an impact on physical health and quality of life for patients, with various noninvasive methods used for relieving myofascial pain. The authors aimed to compare the effectiveness of different noninvasive therapeutic interventions for MPS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The authors searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL Complete, Web of Science, Cochrane, and Scopus to identify randomized controlled trials describing the effects of any noninvasive treatments in patients with MPS. The primary outcome was pain intensity, while pressure pain threshold and pain-related disability were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The analysis included 40 studies. Manual therapy [mean difference (MD) of pain: -1.60, 95% CI: -2.17 to -1.03; MD of pressure pain threshold: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.86; MD of pain-related disability: -5.34, 95% CI: -8.09 to -2.58], laser therapy (MD of pain: -1.15, 95% CI: -1.83 to -0.46; MD of pressure pain threshold: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.46 to 1.54; MD of pain-related disability: -4.58, 95% CI: -7.80 to -1.36), extracorporeal shock wave therapy (MD of pain: -1.61, 95% CI: -2.43 to -0.78; MD of pressure pain threshold: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.35; MD of pain-related disability: -5.78, 95% CI: -9.45 to -2.12), and ultrasound therapy (MD of pain: -1.54, 95% CI: -2.24 to -0.84; MD of pressure pain threshold: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.31 to 1.22) were more effective than no treatment.

CONCLUSION

Our findings support that manual therapy, laser therapy, and extracorporeal shock wave therapy could effectively reduce pain intensity, pressure pain threshold, and pain-related disability with statistical significance when compared with placebo. This finding may provide clinicians with appropriate therapeutic modalities for patients with MPS among different scenarios.

The effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy in individuals with neck pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this meta-analysis was to determine whether high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) was effective in improving pain intensity, cervical range of motion (ROM), functional activity, and quality of life (QOL) in individuals with neck pain.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, PEDro, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to March 26, 2022.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving HILT for neck pain were selected.

DATA EXTRACTION AND DATA SYNTHESIS

Two raters were independent in data extraction. The methodological quality was evaluated using the PEDro scale, and the level of evidence was assessed using the GRADE system. RevMan5.4 was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs were included and their PEDro scores were moderate to high. Compared with placebo, HILT was effective in improving pain intensity (SMD 2.12, 95%CI 1.24 to 3.00; moderate quality evidence), cervical flexion (SMD 1.31, 95%CI 0.27 to 2.35; moderate quality evidence), extension (SMD 1.43, 95%CI 0.24 to 2.63; moderate quality evidence), right lateral flexion (SMD 1.36, 95%CI 0.15 to 2.56; low-quality evidence). There was a trend of better outcome in functional activity after HILT (SMD 1.73, 95%CI -0.05 to 3.54; low quality evidence).

LIMITATIONS

There was limited information available on QOL.

CONCLUSION

HILT may be considered as an adjunctive treatment modality for neck pain. There was moderate quality evidence that HILT may improve pain intensity and cervical ROM in individuals with neck pain, but there was low quality evidence that HILT was not effective in improving functional activity.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42021254078 CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER.

High-Intensity Laser Therapy for Musculoskeletal Disorders: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

High-intensity laser therapy (HILT) is one of the therapeutic approaches used in the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders (MSD). The main objective of this study was to examine the effectiveness of HILT for reducing pain and improving functionality in people with MSD. Ten databases were systematically searched for randomized trials published up to 28 February 2022. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) assessing the effectiveness of HILT on MSD were included. The main outcome measures were pain and functionality. In total, 48 RCTs were included in the qualitative synthesis and 44 RCTs in the quantitative analysis. HILT showed a decrease on the pain VAS (mean difference (MD) = -1.3 cm; confidence interval (CI) 95%: -1.6 to -1.0) and an improvement in functionality (standardized mean difference (SMD) = -1.0; CI95%: -1.4 to -0.7), with low and moderate quality of evidence, respectively. A greater effect was observed when compared with control than with other conservative treatments, both on pain (χ2 = 20.6; p < 0.001) and functionality (χ2 = 5.1; p = 0.02). Differences in the effectiveness of HILT were found depending on the location (χ2 = 40.1 p < 0.001), with further improved functionality in MSD of the knee and shoulder. HILT is an effective treatment for improving pain, functionality, range of motion, and quality of life in people with MSD, although these findings must be treated with caution due to the high risk of bias in the studies. Further clinical trials should be well designed to lower the risk of bias.

Efficacy of low-level laser therapy on pain, disability, pressure pain threshold, and range of motion in patients with myofascial neck pain syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is one of recent modalities for treatment of myofascial neck pain (MNP). Several RCTs have been conducted on its effectiveness. The aim of this comprehensive meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of LLLT on MNP. Electronic databases were searched for identifying eligible studies comparing the effectiveness of LLLT using any wavelength with placebo or active control in myofascial neck pain up to June 2022. Data related to pain intensity, pain pressure threshold (PPT), range of motion (ROM), and disability was analyzed as a pooled estimate of mean difference or standard mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random/fixed-effect model. Funnel plot and Egger's linear regression test were also conducted to examine the risk of publication bias. A total of 13 randomized controlled trials were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis. The data assessing laser effectiveness on different outcomes of 556 patients were considered for meta-analysis. Pooled results revealed that LLLT was significantly effective in pain reduction (MD =  - 1.29, 95% CI =  - 2.36; - 0.23, P < 0.001). Also, secondary outcomes including PPT (SMD of 2.63, 95% CI = 0.96; 4.30, P < 0.01) and right bending ROM (SMD of 3.44, 95% CI = 0.64; 6.24, P < 0.01) were improved, while disability (MD of - 7.83, 95% CI =  - 17.1; 0.08, P = 1.34) did not improve significantly after LLLT. Our meta-data revealed that LLLT may reduce myofascial neck pain and its related outcomes. LLLT is suggested to be used by clinicians along with other therapies such as manual and exercise therapy.

Effectiveness of multiwave locked system laser on the treatment of patients with idiopathic Bell's palsy: a randomized double-blind placebo controlled trial

The objective of this study is to investigate the effect of scanning and point application of multiwave locked system (MLS) laser therapy on the recovery of patients with idiopathic Bell's palsy (IBP). A randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial was carried out on 60 patients with subacute BP. Patients were randomly assigned into three groups of 20 patients each. Facial massage and facial exercises were applied to all patients. Group one received MLS laser as a manual scanning technique (10 J/cm², area 50cm², total energy 500 J). Group two received MLS laser using point application technique (10 J/point, 8 points, total 80 J). Group three received placebo laser. House-Brackmann scale (HBS) and facial disability index (FDI) were used to evaluate the facial recovery. Assessment was performed at baseline and after 3 and 6 weeks of treatment. Comparison within and between groups was performed statistically with significance level p < 0.05. Results showed significant improvement in the FDI and HBS after treatment in all groups. Both scanning and point application significantly improved the score of FDI and HBS more than placebo group. Scanning technique combined with facial massage and exercises had a more significant effect than the point application group or the placebo group in improving FDI and HBS scores after 3 and 6 weeks of treatment. The MLS laser is an effective physiotherapy method used for the treatment of patients with IBP. MLS laser in scanning or point application techniques was more effective than exercise alone with greater effect of scanning technique than point application technique.