PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the current evidence comparing low level to high level laser therapy to reveal any superiorities in the treatment of musculoskeletal disorders.
METHODS: Five databases were searched till September 2022 to obtain relevant RCTs comparing high intensity and low-level laser therapies in the management of musculoskeletal disorders. Two authors assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale and meta-analysis was conducted for studies that showed homogeneity.
RESULTS: Twelve articles were included in this systematic review with a total population of 704 participants across various musculoskeletal pathologies including tennis elbow, carpal tunnel syndrome, chronic non-specific low back pain, knee arthritis, plantar fasciitis, and subacromial impingement. There were no statistical differences between the two interventions in pain, electrophysiological parameters, level of disability, quality of life, postural sway or pressure algometer, however, Low level laser therapy showed superiority in increasing grip strength compared to high intensity laser therapy while results were significant in favour of high intensity laser therapy regarding long head of biceps diameter and cross sectional area, supraspinatus thickness and echogenicity and acromio-humeral distance.
CONCLUSIONS: The current literature suggests no superiority of both types of laser therapy in musculoskeletal disorders, however, more RCTs with larger sample size are required to reach a definitive conclusion regarding the superiority of either form of laser therapy in musculoskeletal disorders.
METHODS: Five databases were searched till September 2022 to obtain relevant RCTs comparing high intensity and low-level laser therapies in the management of musculoskeletal disorders. Two authors assessed the methodological quality of the included studies using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database scale and meta-analysis was conducted for studies that showed homogeneity.
RESULTS: Twelve articles were included in this systematic review with a total population of 704 participants across various musculoskeletal pathologies including tennis elbow, carpal tunnel syndrome, chronic non-specific low back pain, knee arthritis, plantar fasciitis, and subacromial impingement. There were no statistical differences between the two interventions in pain, electrophysiological parameters, level of disability, quality of life, postural sway or pressure algometer, however, Low level laser therapy showed superiority in increasing grip strength compared to high intensity laser therapy while results were significant in favour of high intensity laser therapy regarding long head of biceps diameter and cross sectional area, supraspinatus thickness and echogenicity and acromio-humeral distance.
CONCLUSIONS: The current literature suggests no superiority of both types of laser therapy in musculoskeletal disorders, however, more RCTs with larger sample size are required to reach a definitive conclusion regarding the superiority of either form of laser therapy in musculoskeletal disorders.
摘要：
目的：评估目前的证据，将低水平激光治疗与高水平激光治疗进行比较，以揭示在肌肉骨骼疾病治疗中的任何优势。
方法：直到2022年9月，搜索了五个数据库，以获得相关的RCT，比较高强度和低水平激光治疗在肌肉骨骼疾病管理中的作用。两位作者使用物理治疗证据数据库量表评估了纳入研究的方法学质量，并对显示同质性的研究进行了荟萃分析。
结果：本系统综述包括12篇文章，共有704名参与者参与各种肌肉骨骼疾病，包括网球肘，腕管综合征,慢性非特异性腰痛，膝关节炎,足底筋膜炎,和肩峰下撞击。两种干预措施在疼痛方面没有统计学差异，电生理参数，残疾程度,生活质量,姿势摇摆或压力计，然而,与高强度激光治疗相比，低水平激光治疗在增加握力方面具有优势，而对于二头肌直径和横截面积的长头，高强度激光治疗的结果显着有利于高强度激光治疗。冈上肌厚度和回声和肩峰-肱骨距离。
结论：目前的文献表明两种类型的激光治疗在肌肉骨骼疾病中没有优势，然而,需要更多的RCT和更大的样本量,才能得出关于两种激光治疗方式在肌肉骨骼疾病中的优越性的明确结论.
方法：直到2022年9月，搜索了五个数据库，以获得相关的RCT，比较高强度和低水平激光治疗在肌肉骨骼疾病管理中的作用。两位作者使用物理治疗证据数据库量表评估了纳入研究的方法学质量，并对显示同质性的研究进行了荟萃分析。
结果：本系统综述包括12篇文章，共有704名参与者参与各种肌肉骨骼疾病，包括网球肘，腕管综合征,慢性非特异性腰痛，膝关节炎,足底筋膜炎,和肩峰下撞击。两种干预措施在疼痛方面没有统计学差异，电生理参数，残疾程度,生活质量,姿势摇摆或压力计，然而,与高强度激光治疗相比，低水平激光治疗在增加握力方面具有优势，而对于二头肌直径和横截面积的长头，高强度激光治疗的结果显着有利于高强度激光治疗。冈上肌厚度和回声和肩峰-肱骨距离。
结论：目前的文献表明两种类型的激光治疗在肌肉骨骼疾病中没有优势，然而,需要更多的RCT和更大的样本量,才能得出关于两种激光治疗方式在肌肉骨骼疾病中的优越性的明确结论.
