Low-level laser therapy for chronic non-specific low back pain: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
Glazov G, Yelland M, Emery J
Acupuncture in medicine : journal of the British Medical Acupuncture Society · 82 citations
How it was studied
- Design
- Meta-analysis (indexed by PubMed)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
Based on full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2016-05-23 · Acupunct Med · vol. 34 · issue 5 · pp. 328–341
- Publisher
- SAGE Publishing
- Cited
- 122 citations · more than 79% of similar papers · 1.5× the field average
- References
- 37 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY-NC
- Research areas
- Laser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine · Acupuncture Treatment Research Studies · Myofascial pain diagnosis and treatment
- Keywords
- Medicine, Acupuncture, Meta-analysis, Physical therapy, Chronic pain, Randomized controlled trial, Low back pain, Alternative medicine, Surgery, Internal medicine, Pathology
- MeSH
- humans, low back pain, treatment outcome, acupuncture therapy, adult, aged, middle aged, female, male, randomized controlled trials as topic, chronic pain, low-level light therapy
3 authors
From AU
- Gregory Yuri Glazov · correspondingThe University of Western Australia
- Michael J. YellandGriffith University
- Jon David EmeryThe University of Melbourne
Abstract
Objective
The efficacy of low-level laser treatment (LLLT) for chronic back pain remains controversial due to insufficient trial data. We aimed to conduct an updated review to determine if LLLT (including laser acupuncture) has specific benefits in chronic non-specific low back pain (CNLBP).
Methods
Electronic databases were searched for randomised trials using sham controls and blinded assessment examining the intervention of LLLT in adults with CNLBP. Primary outcomes were pain and global assessment of improvement with up to short-term follow-up. Secondary outcomes were disability, range of back movement, and adverse effects. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted. Subgroup analyses were based on laser dose, duration of baseline pain, and whether or not laser therapy used an acupuncture approach.
Results
15 studies were selected involving 1039 participants. At immediate and short-term follow-up there was significant pain reduction of up to WMD (weighted mean difference) -1.40 cm (95% CI -1.91 to -0.88 cm) in favour of laser treatment, occurring in trials using at least 3 Joules (J) per point, with baseline pain <30 months and in non-acupuncture LLLT trials. Global assessment showed a risk ratio of 2.16 (95% CI 1.61 to 2.90) in favour of laser treatment in the same groups only at immediate follow-up.
Conclusions
We demonstrated moderate quality of evidence (GRADE) to support a clinically important benefit in LLLT for CNLBP in the short term, which was only seen following higher laser dose interventions and in participants with a shorter duration of back pain. Rigorously blinded trials using appropriate laser dosage would provide greater certainty around this conclusion.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY-NC).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.