-
BMJ Open Sep 2022We investigated the effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in lower extremity tendinopathy and plantar fasciitis on patient-reported pain and disability. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Efficacy of low-level laser therapy in patients with lower extremity tendinopathy or plantar fasciitis: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.
OBJECTIVES
We investigated the effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in lower extremity tendinopathy and plantar fasciitis on patient-reported pain and disability.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Eligible articles in any language were identified through PubMed, Embase and Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) on the 20 August 2020, references, citations and experts.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTION OF STUDIES
Only randomised controlled trials involving participants with lower extremity tendinopathy or plantar fasciitis treated with LLLT were included.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Random effects meta-analyses with dose subgroups based on the World Association for Laser Therapy treatment recommendations were conducted. Risk of bias was assessed with the PEDro scale.
RESULTS
LLLT was compared with placebo (10 trials), other interventions (5 trials) and as an add-on intervention (3 trials). The study quality was moderate to high.Overall, pain was significantly reduced by LLLT at completed therapy (13.15 mm Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 95% CI 7.82 to 18.48)) and 4-12 weeks later (12.56 mm VAS (95% CI 5.69 to 19.42)). Overall, disability was significantly reduced by LLLT at completed therapy (Standardised Mean Difference (SMD)=0.39 (95% CI 0.09 to 0.7) and 4-9 weeks later (SMD=0.32 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.59)). Compared with placebo control, the recommended doses significantly reduced pain at completed therapy (14.98 mm VAS (95% CI 3.74 to 26.22)) and 4-8 weeks later (14.00 mm VAS (95% CI 2.81 to 25.19)). The recommended doses significantly reduced pain as an add-on to exercise therapy versus exercise therapy alone at completed therapy (18.15 mm VAS (95% CI 10.55 to 25.76)) and 4-9 weeks later (15.90 mm VAS (95% CI 2.3 to 29.51)). No adverse events were reported.
CONCLUSION
LLLT significantly reduces pain and disability in lower extremity tendinopathy and plantar fasciitis in the short and medium term. Long-term data were not available. Some uncertainty about the effect size remains due to wide CIs and lack of large trials.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42017077511.
Topics: Fasciitis, Plantar; Humans; Low-Level Light Therapy; Lower Extremity; Pain; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tendinopathy
PubMed: 36171024
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059479 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2023Patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in preterm infants. Several non-pharmacological, pharmacological, and surgical... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality in preterm infants. Several non-pharmacological, pharmacological, and surgical approaches have been explored to prevent or treat a PDA.
OBJECTIVES
To summarise Cochrane Neonatal evidence on interventions (pharmacological or surgical) for the prevention of PDA and related complications, and interventions for the management of asymptomatic and symptomatic PDA in preterm infants.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews on 20 October 2022 for ongoing and published Cochrane Reviews on the prevention and treatment of PDA in preterm (< 37 weeks' gestation) or low birthweight (< 2500 g) infants. We included all published Cochrane Reviews assessing the following categories of interventions: pharmacological therapy using prostaglandin inhibitor drugs (indomethacin, ibuprofen, and acetaminophen), adjunctive pharmacological interventions, invasive PDA closure procedures, and non-pharmacological interventions. Two overview authors independently checked the eligibility of the reviews retrieved by the search, and extracted data from the included reviews using a predefined data extraction form. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion with a third overview author. Two overview authors independently assessed the methodological quality of the included reviews using the AMSTAR 2 (A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews) tool. We reported the GRADE certainty of evidence as assessed by the respective review authors using summary of findings tables.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 16 Cochrane Reviews, corresponding to 138 randomised clinical trials (RCT) and 11,856 preterm infants, on the prevention and treatment of PDA in preterm infants. One of the 16 reviews had no included studies, and therefore, did not contribute to the results. Six reviews reported on prophylactic interventions for the prevention of PDA and included pharmacological prophylaxis with prostaglandin inhibitor drugs, prophylactic surgical PDA ligation, and non-pharmacologic interventions (chest shielding during phototherapy and restriction of fluid intake); one review reported on the use of indomethacin for the management of asymptomatic PDA; nine reviews reported on interventions for the management of symptomatic PDA, and included pharmacotherapy with prostaglandin inhibitor drugs in various routes and dosages, surgical PDA ligation, and adjunct therapies (use of furosemide and dopamine in conjunction with indomethacin). The quality of reviews varied. Two reviews were assessed to be high quality, seven reviews were of moderate quality, five of low quality, while two reviews were deemed to be of critically low quality. For prevention of PDA, prophylactic indomethacin reduces severe intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH; relative risk (RR) 0.66, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.82; 14 RCTs, 2588 infants), and the need for invasive PDA closure (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.71; 8 RCTs, 1791 infants), but it does not appear to affect the composite outcome of death or moderate/severe neurodevelopmental disability (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.15; 3 RCTs, 1491 infants). Prophylactic ibuprofen probably marginally reduces severe IVH (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.00; 7 RCTs, 925 infants; moderate-certainty evidence), and the need for invasive PDA closure (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.96; 7 RCTs, 925 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain on the effect of prophylactic acetaminophen on severe IVH (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.39; 1 RCT, 48 infants). Necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) was lower with both prophylactic surgical ligation (RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.83; 1 RCT, 84 infants), and fluid restriction (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.87; 4 RCTs, 526 infants). For treatment of asymptomatic PDA, indomethacin appears to reduce the development of symptomatic PDA post-treatment (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.68; 3 RCTs, 97 infants; quality of source review: critically low). For treatment of symptomatic PDA, all available prostaglandin inhibitor drugs appear to be more effective in closing a PDA than placebo or no treatment (indomethacin: RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.38; 10 RCTs, 654 infants; high-certainty evidence; ibuprofen: RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.86; 2 RCTs, 206 infants; moderate-certainty evidence; early administration of acetaminophen: RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.53; 2 RCTs, 127 infants; low-certainty evidence). Oral ibuprofen appears to be more effective in PDA closure than intravenous (IV) ibuprofen (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.56; 5 RCTs, 406 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). High-dose ibuprofen appears to be more effective in PDA closure than standard-dose ibuprofen (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.61; 3 RCTs, 190 infants; moderate-certainty evidence). With respect to adverse outcomes, compared to indomethacin administration, NEC appears to be lower with ibuprofen (any route; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.94; 18 RCTs, 1292 infants; moderate-certainty evidence), oral ibuprofen (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.73; 7 RCTs, 249 infants; low-certainty evidence), and with acetaminophen (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.96; 4 RCTs, 384 infants; low-certainty evidence). However, NEC appears to be increased with a prolonged course of indomethacin versus a shorter course (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.27; 4 RCTs, 310 infants).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This overview summarised the evidence from 16 Cochrane Reviews of RCTs regarding the effects of interventions for the prevention and treatment of PDA in preterm infants. Prophylactic indomethacin reduces severe IVH, but does not appear to affect the composite outcome of death or moderate/severe neurodevelopmental disability. Prophylactic ibuprofen probably marginally reduces severe IVH (moderate-certainty evidence), while the evidence is very uncertain on the effect of prophylactic acetaminophen on severe IVH. All available prostaglandin inhibitor drugs appear to be effective in symptomatic PDA closure compared to no treatment (high-certainty evidence for indomethacin; moderate-certainty evidence for ibuprofen; low-certainty evidence for early administration of acetaminophen). Oral ibuprofen appears to be more effective in PDA closure than IV ibuprofen (moderate-certainty evidence). High dose ibuprofen appears to be more effective in PDA closure than standard-dose ibuprofen (moderate-certainty evidence). There are currently two ongoing reviews, one on fluid restriction for symptomatic PDA, and the other on invasive management of PDA in preterm infants.
Topics: Infant, Newborn; Humans; Ductus Arteriosus, Patent; Ibuprofen; Cyclooxygenase Inhibitors; Acetaminophen; Prostaglandin Antagonists; Systematic Reviews as Topic; Infant, Premature; Indomethacin
PubMed: 37039501
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013588.pub2 -
The Journal of Clinical and Aesthetic... Jun 2023Phototherapy has gained popularity in the recent decades for the treatment of various immune-mediated dermatological conditions since it is more-cost effective and less...
Phototherapy has gained popularity in the recent decades for the treatment of various immune-mediated dermatological conditions since it is more-cost effective and less toxic compared to systemic therapies. This systematic review aims to inform dermatology providers of the risks and benefits of phototherapy, especially in patients at risk for malignancies. Ionizing energy from phototherapy results in DNA photolesions, namely of cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers (CPDs) and 6-4 photoproducts (6-4PPs). Without adequate repair, these mutations increase the risk for carcinogenesis. Additionally, phototherapy can also indirectly cause DNA damage through the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), which damage of several structural and functional proteins and DNA. When choosing a phototherapy modality, it also important to take into consideration the side effect profiles associated with each modality. For instance, a 10-fold higher dose of NB-UVB is required to produce a similar amount of CPDs compared with BB-UVB. Patients who undergo UVA with psoralen (PUVA) can be susceptible to developing skin malignancies up to 25 years after receiving their last treatment. It would behoove providers to consider optimal radiation dosage given each patients' level of skin pigmentation and potential for photoadaptation. Additionally, there are measures have been proposed to minimize deleterious skin changes, such as a 42-degree Celsius heat treatment using a 308nm excimer laser prior to UVB phototherapy and low frequency, low intensity electromagnetic fields along with UVB. However, as performing routine skin exams, remain paramount in the prevention of phototherapy-induced neoplasia.
PubMed: 37361361
DOI: No ID Found -
Pain Physician May 2019Fibromyalgia is a chronic disorder characterized by widespread pain and tenderness. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT), an emerging nonpharmacological treatment, has been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Fibromyalgia is a chronic disorder characterized by widespread pain and tenderness. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT), an emerging nonpharmacological treatment, has been used for relieving musculoskeletal or neuropathic pain.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this review and meta-analysis was to determine the efficacy of LLLT on patients with fibromyalgia.
STUDY DESIGN
This study involved systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis of published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
SETTING
This study examined all RCTs evaluating the effect of LLLT on fibromyalgia.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs evaluating the effect of LLLT on patients with fibromyalgia. PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched for articles published before August 2018. RCTs meeting our selection criteria were included. The methodological quality of the RCTs was evaluated according to the Cochrane risk-for-bias method. Review Manager version 5.3 was used to perform the meta-analysis. The primary outcomes were the total scores on the Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire (FIQ), pain severity, and number of tender points. The secondary outcomes were changes in fatigue, stiffness, anxiety, and depression. Standardized mean difference (SMD), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and P values were calculated for outcome analysis.
RESULTS
We identified 9 RCTs that included 325 fibromyalgia patients undergoing LLLT or placebo laser treatment with or without an exercise program. The meta-analysis showed that patients receiving LLLT demonstrated significantly greater improvement in their FIQ scores (SMD: 1.16; 95% CI, 0.64-1.69), pain severity (SMD: 1.18; 95% CI, 0.82-1.54), number of tender points (SMD: 1.01; 95% CI, 0.49-1.52), fatigue (SMD: 1.4; 95% CI, 0.96-1.84), stiffness (SMD: 0.92; 95% CI, 0.36-1.48), depression (SMD: 1.46; 95% CI, 0.93-2.00), and anxiety (SMD: 1.46; 95% CI, 0.45-2.47) than those receiving placebo laser. Furthermore, when compared with the standardized exercise program alone, LLLT plus the standardized exercise program provided no extra advantage in the relief of symptoms. On the other hand, the results of the only RCT using combined LLLT/LED phototherapy showed significant improvement in most outcomes except for depression when compared to placebo. When compared with pure exercise therapy, combined LLLT/LED phototherapy plus exercise therapy had additional benefits in reducing the severity of pain, number of tender points, and fatigue.
LIMITATIONS
There were some limitations in this review, mostly because of the low-to-middle methodological quality of the selected studies; for example, there was no clear allocation process and only patients were blinded in most studies. In addition, one study used per-protocol analysis with a 20% loss to follow-up. On the other hand, the differences in laser types, energy sources, exposure times, and associated medication status in these studies may have resulted in some heterogeneity.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results provided the most up-to-date and relevant evidence regarding the effects of LLLT in fibromyalgia. LLLT is an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment for fibromyalgia.
KEY WORDS
Low-level laser therapy, fibromyalgia, meta-analysis, FIQ, pain, tender points,exercise.
Topics: Fibromyalgia; Humans; Low-Level Light Therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31151332
DOI: No ID Found -
Journal of Periodontal Research Feb 2017Although low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been demonstrated to have a biomodulatory effect on periodontal tissue, no systematic review has exclusively addressed its... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
Although low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been demonstrated to have a biomodulatory effect on periodontal tissue, no systematic review has exclusively addressed its effectiveness as an adjunct to non-surgical periodontal treatment. This study aimed to evaluate whether an additional benefit exists for the application of LLLT compared with scaling and root planing (SRP) alone.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An extensive search was conducted in the Cochrane Library (Issue 8, 2015), PubMed (1997) and EMBASE (1947) before August 2015 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The bias risk was assessed with the Cochrane tool for risk of bias evaluation. A meta-analysis was performed using REVMAN 5.3.
RESULTS
After independent screening of 354 initial records, eight publications (seven RCTs) were included. However, six were rated as 'having a high risk of bias' as a result of major methodological weakness in 'allocation concealment' and 'blinding of key personnel'. Meta-analysis showed that LLLT-mediated SRP demonstrated significant short-term benefits over SRP monotherapy in the improvement of the probing pocket depth (p = 0.0009 at 1 mo; p = 0.03 at 2 mo) and the level of interleukin-1β in the gingival crevicular fluid (p = 0.01 at 1 mo). Nevertheless, LLLT failed to show significant additional intermediate-term (3 and 6 mo) effects in terms of clinical parameters and alveolar bone density.
CONCLUSION
These findings indicated that LLLT showed only short-term additional benefits after conventional SRP. Its long-term effects remain unclear due to substantial methodological weaknesses and an insufficient number of current studies. Future RCTs with better designs and longer follow-up periods are required to assess the effectiveness of LLLT as an adjunctive treatment strategy in patients with periodontal disease.
Topics: Combined Modality Therapy; Dental Scaling; Humans; Low-Level Light Therapy; Periodontitis; Root Planing
PubMed: 26932392
DOI: 10.1111/jre.12361 -
Journal of Periodontology Jul 2018Peri-implant diseases are prevalent, with numerous therapies studied in an attempt to combat this condition. The present review aims to systematically evaluate the...
BACKGROUND
Peri-implant diseases are prevalent, with numerous therapies studied in an attempt to combat this condition. The present review aims to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of laser therapy with non-surgical or surgical therapy in managing peri-implant mucositis and peri-implantitis.
METHODS
An electronic search of three databases and a hand search of peer-reviewed journals for relevant articles published (in English) from January 1980 to June 2016 were performed. Human clinical trials of ≥ 10 patients with peri-implant diseases, treated with surgical or non-surgical approaches and laser therapy, and a follow-up period of ≥ 6 months, were included. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to analyze weighted mean difference (WMD) and confidence interval for the recorded variables according to PRISMA guidelines. Risk of bias assessment was also performed for randomized controlled trials included.
RESULTS
From 22 articles selected, 11 were included in the meta-analyses. The outcomes of using lasers as a monotherapy could not be evaluated since no controlled studies were identified. Therefore, all reported results were the outcomes of applying lasers as an adjunct to surgical/non-surgical treatment. For the non-surgical approach, WMD of probing depth (PD), clinical attachment level (CAL), bleeding on probing (BOP), plaque index (PI), marginal bone level (MBL) and recession (REC) was 0.15 mm (P = 0.50), -0.10 mm (P = 0.32), 21.08% (P = 0.02), -0.07 (P = 0.002), -0.22 mm (P = 0.04) and -0.11 mm (P = 0.34), respectively. For the surgical approach with a long-term follow up, WMD of PD, CAL, BOP, and PI was 0.45 mm (P = 0.11), 0.22 mm (P = 0.56), 7.26% (P = 0.76) and -0.09 (P = 0.84), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence shows laser therapy in combination with surgical/non-surgical therapy provided minimal benefit in PD reduction, CAL gain, amount of REC improvement, and PI reduction in the treatment of peri-implant diseases. Lasers when used as an adjunct to non-surgical therapy might result in more BOP reduction in the short term. However, current evidence allowed for analysis of only Er:YAG, CO , and diode lasers. Studies on others failed to have controlled evidence supporting their evaluation.
Topics: Dental Implants; Humans; Laser Therapy; Low-Level Light Therapy; Mucositis; Peri-Implantitis; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stomatitis; United States
PubMed: 30133748
DOI: 10.1902/jop.2017.160483 -
RMD Open Aug 2023Through this systematic literature review, we assembled evidence to inform the EULAR recommendations for the non-pharmacological management of systemic lupus... (Review)
Review
Through this systematic literature review, we assembled evidence to inform the EULAR recommendations for the non-pharmacological management of systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) and systemic sclerosis (SSc). We screened articles published between January 2000 and June 2021. Studies selected for data extraction (118 for SLE and 92 for SSc) were thematically categorised by the character of their intervention. Of 208 articles included, 51 were classified as robust in critical appraisal. Physical activity was the most studied management strategy and was found to be efficacious in both diseases. Patient education and self-management also constituted widely studied topics. Many studies on SLE found psychological interventions to improve quality of life. Studies on SSc found phototherapy and laser treatment to improve cutaneous disease manifestations. In summary, non-pharmacological management of SLE and SSc encompasses a wide range of interventions, which can be combined and provided either with or without adjunct pharmacological treatment but should not aim to substitute the latter when this is deemed required. While some management strategies i.e., physical exercise and patient education, are already established in current clinical practice in several centres, others e.g., phototherapy and laser treatment, show both feasibility and efficacy, yet require testing in more rigorous trials than those hitherto conducted.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Scleroderma, Systemic; Lupus Erythematosus, Systemic
PubMed: 37532469
DOI: 10.1136/rmdopen-2023-003297 -
Brain and Behavior May 2023This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of phototherapy intervention on cognitive function in older adult patients with dementia. PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of phototherapy intervention on cognitive function in older adult patients with dementia. PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO, and Clinical Trials were searched from their inception to August 10, 2022, for randomized controlled trials involving patients with dementia who received phototherapy interventions. We used the weighted mean difference (MD) or standard weighted mean difference to generate the pooled estimates. The primary outcome was cognitive function as measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score. The secondary outcomes were the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSDs) and sleep. This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42022343788). We included 12 randomized controlled trials comprising 766 patients with dementia (426 patients in the intervention group and 340 in the control group). Phototherapy interventions significantly improved MMSE scores (n = 3, MD 2.68, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.38-3.98, I = 0%). There were no significant differences in the Cornell Scale for Depression in Dementia score, Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory score (MD: -3.12, 95% CI: -8.05, 1.82, I = 0%), Neuropsychiatric Inventory score, sleep efficiency, total sleep time, and Sleep Disorders Inventory score between the groups. Our systematic review and meta-analysis showed that phototherapy significantly improved cognitive function in patients with dementia.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Dementia; Phototherapy; Anxiety; Cognition
PubMed: 37017012
DOI: 10.1002/brb3.2952 -
Archives of Dermatological Research Apr 2022There is increasing demand for home-based devices for the treatment of dermatologic conditions and cosmesis. Commercially available devices include intense pulsed light,...
There is increasing demand for home-based devices for the treatment of dermatologic conditions and cosmesis. Commercially available devices include intense pulsed light, laser diodes, radiofrequency, light-emitting diodes, and ultraviolet B phototherapy. The objective of this report is to evaluate the current evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of home-based devices for the treatment of skin conditions. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and Cinahl was conducted on November 9, 2020 using PRISMA guidelines. Original research articles that investigated the efficacy and safety of home-based devices for dermatologic use were included. Bibliographies were screened for additional relevant articles. Strength of evidence was graded using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine guidelines. Clinical recommendations were then made based on the quality of the existing literature. After review, 37 clinical trials were included-19 were randomized controlled trials, 16 were case series, and 2 were non-randomized controlled trials. Ultimately, from our analysis, we recommend the home-based use of intense pulsed light for hair removal, laser diodes for androgenic alopecia, low power radiofrequency for rhytides and wrinkles, and light-emitting diodes for acne vulgaris. Trials investigating ultraviolet B phototherapy for psoriasis revealed mixed evidence for home treatments compared to clinic treatments. All devices had favorable safety profiles with few significant adverse events. Limitations to our review include a limited number of randomized controlled trials as well as a lack of data on the long-term efficacy and safety of each device.
Topics: Cosmetic Techniques; Dermatology; Device Approval; Hair Removal; Humans; Laser Therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Self Administration; Skin Aging
PubMed: 33938981
DOI: 10.1007/s00403-021-02231-0 -
Journal of Medicine and Life 2021Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs) encompass a wide array of ailments affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ), muscles of mastication, and the allied...
Temporomandibular joint disorders (TMDs) encompass a wide array of ailments affecting the temporomandibular joint (TMJ), muscles of mastication, and the allied structural framework. Myofascial pain, internal derangement of the joint, and degenerative joint diseases constitute the majority of TMDs. TMDs usually have a multifactorial etiology, and treatment modalities range from conservative therapies to surgical interventions. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has evolved as an efficient non-invasive therapeutic modality in TMDs. Previously conducted systematic reviews and meta-analyses have shown variable results regarding the efficiency of LLLT in TMJ disorder patients. Hence, this systematic review was carried out as an attempt to evaluate the efficacy of LLLT in the treatment of temporomandibular joint disorder patients.
Topics: Humans; Low-Level Light Therapy; Publication Bias; Risk; Software; Temporomandibular Joint Disorders
PubMed: 34104237
DOI: 10.25122/jml-2020-0169