Neglect of relevant treatment recommendations in the conduct and reporting of a laser therapy knee osteoarthritis trial: letter to the editor

We read with interest the article by Gomes et al. entitled: “Exercise program combined with electrophysical modalities in subjects with knee osteoarthritis: A randomised, placebo-controlled clinical trial”. Gomes et al. concluded that the low-level laser therapy (LLLT) did not reduce knee osteoarthritis pain when applied as an adjunct to exercise therapy. We argue that Gomes et al. neglected relevant laser treatment recommendations in the conduct and reporting of the trial. Gomes et al. did not state the Joules per treatment spot applied. We calculated the Joules applied from other laser information in the report and found that it is too low of a dose according to the World Association for Laser Therapy (WALT) guidelines. Furthermore, we have published a meta-analysis of 22 placebo-controlled trials demonstrating a significant difference in pain-relieving effect between doses in adherence and non-adherence to the WALT guidelines. However, neither the WALT guidelines, nor our meta-analysis was mentioned by Gomes et al. Moreover, Gomes et al. did not state whether the output power of the laser device was measured, and this is concerning because in the city of São Paulo, where the trial was conducted, most laser devices have been found to deliver less of a dose than specified by the manufacturers. In summary, we found that the best available evidence regarding effective and ineffective LLLT dosing from systematic reviews was neglected in the conduct and reporting of the trial, and that the laser device may not have been calibrated.publishedVersio

Pain pressure threshold algometry in knee osteoarthritis: intra- and inter-rater reliability

Introduction: Synovitis and effusion can cause pain sensitization in persons with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). Pain Pressure Threshold (PPT) algometry is a means to quantify somatosensory abnormalities, including inflammatory-mediated pressure hyperalgesia. We investigated the reliability of PPT algometry with three raters. Methods: Twenty-seven persons (50 knees) with KOA, according to the American College of Rheumatology criteria, were included. The PPT of the most tender spot in the joint line of each knee, identified by palpation, was assessed using a digital pressure algometer with a round 1 cm2 rubber tip. The algometer was applied three times with at least twenty-second intervals by three physiotherapists each in a single session. Two of the physiotherapists had no experience with the procedure prior to the study. We estimated the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) model 2.1, 95% within-subject standard deviation (sw), and Minimal Detectable Difference (MDD). Results: The mean PPTs ranged from 39.94 to 41.81 Newton (N), the intra-rater ICC ranged from 0.909 to 0.956, the sw ranged from 6.44 to 10.77 N, and the related MDD ranged from 9.11 to 15.23 N. The three raters achieved an inter-rater ICC of 0.707, an sw of 17.68 N, and an MDD of 25.01 N. The results were homoscedastic. Conclusions: Our results indicate that PPT algometry is a suitable method for assessment of pain in osteoarthritic knees. After a short session of PPT procedure training, good intra-rater and acceptable inter-rater ICCs were achieved.publishedVersio

Efficacy of mobilisation with movement in chronic shoulder pain: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled trials

Introduction Shoulder pain affects approximately one in four adults and is thus one of the most common musculoskeletal problems. Only 50% of patients who begin treatment for shoulder pain are cured within 6 months. There is a need for systematic reviews to estimate the effectiveness of shoulder treatments. We decided to evaluate the effect of mobilisation with movement (MWM) on chronic shoulder pain in a systematic review. Methods and analysis The review will include controlled trial articles identified via five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Physiotherapy Evidence Database and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), reference lists, citations searches and experts in the field. Only controlled trials involving participants with a mean duration of pain of ≥3 months, in which the effectiveness of MWM has been compared with non-invasive treatments, sham mobilisation or wait-and-see will be included. The included trials will be synthesised with random effects meta-analyses. Risk-of-bias will be assessed with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database 0–10 point scale. Ethics and dissemination The review does not require ethics approval as it is based on anonymised data from trial reports. The results of the review will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication.publishedVersio

Short-term efficacy of physical interventions in osteoarthritic knee pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised placebo-controlled trials

Background: Treatment efficacy of physical agents in osteoarthritis of the knee (OAK) pain has been largely unknown, and this systematic review was aimed at assessing their short-term efficacies for pain relief. Methods: Systematic review with meta-analysis of efficacy within 1–4 weeks and at follow up at 1–12 weeks after the end of treament. Results: 36 randomised placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) were identified with 2434 patients where 1391 patients received active treatment. 33 trials satisfied three or more out of five methodological criteria (Jadad scale). The patient sample had a mean age of 65.1 years and mean baseline pain of 62.9 mm on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS). Within 4 weeks of the commencement of treatment manual acupuncture, static magnets and ultrasound therapies did not offer statistically significant short-term pain relief over placebo. Pulsed electromagnetic fields offered a small reduction in pain of 6.9 mm [95% CI: 2.2 to 11.6] (n = 487). Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS, including interferential currents), electro-acupuncture (EA) and low level laser therapy (LLLT) offered clinically relevant pain relieving effects of 18.8 mm [95% CI: 9.6 to 28.1] (n = 414), 21.9 mm [95% CI: 17.3 to 26.5] (n = 73) and 17.7 mm [95% CI: 8.1 to 27.3] (n = 343) on VAS respectively versus placebo control. In a subgroup analysis of trials with assumed optimal doses, short-term efficacy increased to 22.2 mm [95% CI: 18.1 to 26.3] for TENS, and 24.2 mm [95% CI: 17.3 to 31.3] for LLLT on VAS. Follow-up data up to 12 weeks were sparse, but positive effects seemed to persist for at least 4 weeks after the course of LLLT, EA and TENS treatment was stopped. Conclusion: TENS, EA and LLLT administered with optimal doses in an intensive 2–4 week treatment regimen, seem to offer clinically relevant short-term pain relief for OAK

Shoulder rotational strength profiles of danish national level badminton players

Background Increased age has been shown to be associated with weaker external rotators and stronger internal rotators of the shoulder in pitchers and tennis players. Whether this age-associated change is present in elite badminton players is unknown. Purpose To compare the internal and external rotation strength of the shoulder in adolescent and adult elite badminton players. Study design Cross-sectional. Methods Thirty-one adolescent (12 females aged 16.8 ± 1.6 years and 19 males aged 17.1 ± 1.6 years) and 29 adult (10 females aged 25 ± 2.9 years and 19 males aged 26.2 ± 4.6 years) national level badminton players were tested pre-seasonally for external rotation (ER) and internal rotation (IR) isometric muscle strength bilaterally, using a hand-held dynamometer. Within-group ER to IR strength ratios were calculated (ER/IR×100%). Results The adolescents had stronger shoulder ER than the adults on both sides (p < 0.05). The adult males tended to have stronger IR of the dominant shoulder than the adolescent males (p = 0.071). In the dominant shoulders, the strength ratios for adult females and males were 77% and 78%, respectively, while the same ratio for adolescent females and males were 85% and 99%, respectively. In the non-dominant shoulders, the ER/IR strength ratios for adult females and males were 90% and 87%, respectively, while the ratios for adolescent females and males were 116% and 102%, respectively. Conclusion This study is the first to demonstrate that in shoulder injury-free national team badminton players, adolescents have stronger shoulder ER than adults on both sides. Therefore, increased age appears to be associated with weaker shoulder ER muscles in elite badminton players.publishedVersio

Low-level laser therapy in acute pain: a systematic review of possible mechanisms of action and clinical effects in randomized placebo-controlled trials,”

ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to review the biological and clinical short-term effects of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in acute pain from soft-tissue injury. Background Data: It is unclear if and how LLLT can reduce acute pain. Methods: Literature search of (i) controlled laboratory trials investigating potential biological mechanisms for pain relief and (ii) randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials which measure outcomes within the first 7 days after acute soft-tissue injury. Results: There is strong evidence from 19 out of 22 controlled laboratory studies that LLLT can modulate inflammatory pain by reducing levels of biochemical markers (PGE 2 , mRNA Cox 2, IL-1␤, TNF␣), neutrophil cell influx, oxidative stress, and formation of edema and hemorrhage in a dosedependent manner (median dose 7.5 J/cm 2 , range 0.3-19 J/cm 2 ). Four comparisons with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in animal studies found optimal doses of LLLT and NSAIDs to be equally effective. Seven randomized placebo-controlled trials found no significant results after irradiating only a single point on the skin overlying the site of injury, or after using a total energy dose below 5 Joules. Nine randomized placebo-controlled trials (n = 609) were of acceptable methodological quality, and irradiated three or more points and/or more than 2.5 cm 2 at site of injury or surgical incision, with a total energy of 5.0-19.5 Joules. Results in these nine trials were significantly in favor of LLLT groups over placebo groups in 15 out of 18 outcome comparisons. Poor and heterogeneous data presentation hampered statistical pooling of continuous data. Categorical data of subjective improvement were homogeneous (Q-value = 7.1) and could be calculated from four trials (n = 379) giving a significant relative risk for improvement of 2.7 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.8-3.9) in a fixed effects model. Conclusion: LLLT can modulate inflammatory processes in a dose-dependent manner and can be titrated to significantly reduce acute inflammatory pain in clinical settings. Further clinical trials with adequate LLLT doses are needed to precisely estimate the effect size for LLLT in acute pain

Photobiomodulation therapy does not decrease pain and disability in people with non-specific low back pain: a systematic review

Question: In people with non-specific low back pain (LBP), what are the effects of photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) on pain, disability and other outcomes when compared with no intervention, sham PBMT and other treatments, and when used as an adjunct to other treatments? Design: Systematic review of randomised trials with meta-analysis. Participants: People with acute/subacute or chronic non-specific LBP. Interventions: Any type of PBMT (laser class I, II and III and light-emitting diodes) compared with no treatment, sham PBMT and other types of treatment, or used as an adjunct to another treatment. Outcome measures: Pain intensity, disability, overall improvement, quality of life, work absence and adverse effects. Results: Twelve randomised controlled trials were included (pooled n = 1,046). Most trials had low risk of bias. Compared with sham PBMT, the effect of PBMT on pain and disability was clinically unimportant in people with acute/subacute or chronic LBP. In people with chronic LBP, there was no clinically important difference between the effect of PBMT and the effect of exercise on pain or disability. Although benefits were observed on some other outcomes, these estimates were imprecise and/or based on low-quality evidence. PBMT was estimated to reduce pain (MD −11.20, 95% CI −20.92 to −1.48) and disability (MD −11.90, 95% CI −17.37 to −6.43) more than ultrasound, but these confidence intervals showed important uncertainty about whether the differences in effect were worthwhile or trivial. Conversely, PBMT was estimated to reduce pain (MD 19.00, 95% CI 9.49 to 28.51) and disability (MD 17.40, 95% CI 8.60 to 26.20) less than Tecar (Energy Transfer Capacitive and Resistive) therapy, with marginal uncertainty that these differences in effect were worthwhile. Conclusion: Current evidence does not support the use of PBMT to decrease pain and disability in people with non-specific LBP.publishedVersio

Photobiomodulation Therapy is Able to Modulate PGE2 Levels in Patients With Chronic Non‐Specific Low Back Pain: A Randomized Placebo‐Controlled Trial

Background and Objectives Non-specific low back pain (LBP) is responsible for triggering increased biomarkers levels. In this way, photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) may be an interesting alternative to treat these patients. One of the possible biological mechanisms of PBMT involved to decrease pain intensity in patients with musculoskeletal disorders is modulation of the inflammatory mediators’ levels. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of PBMT compared with placebo on inflammatory mediators’ levels and pain intensity in patients with chronic non-specific LBP. Study Design/Materials and Methods A prospectively registered, randomized triple-blinded (volunteers, therapists, and assessors), placebo-controlled trial was performed. Eighteen patients with chronic non-specific LBP were recruited and treated with a single session of active PBMT or placebo PBMT. The primary outcome of the study was serum prostaglandin E2 levels and the secondary outcomes were tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-6 levels, and pain intensity. All outcomes were measured before and after 15 minutes of treatment session. Results PBMT was able to decrease prostaglandin E2 levels at post-treatment compared with placebo, with a mean difference of −1470 pg/ml, 95% confidence interval −2906 to −33.67 in patients with LBP. There was no difference between groups in the other measured outcomes. Patients did not report any adverse events. Conclusion Our results suggest that PBMT was able to modulate prostaglandin E2 levels, indicating that this may be one of the mechanisms involved in the analgesic effects of PBMT in patients with LBP.publishedVersio

Effectiveness of Low-Level Laser Therapy Associated with Strength Training in Knee Osteoarthritis: Protocol for a Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

Physical activity and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) can reduce knee osteoarthritis (KOA) inflammation. We are conducting a randomized placebo-controlled trial to investigate the long-term effectiveness of LLLT combined with strength training (ST) in persons with KOA, since it, to our knowledge, has not been investigated before. Fifty participants were enrolled. LLLT and ST was performed 3 times per week over 3 and 8 weeks, respectively. In the LLLT group, 3 Joules of 904 nm wavelength laser was applied to 15 spots per knee (45 Joules/knee/session). The primary outcomes are pain during movement, at night and at rest (Visual Analogue Scale) and global pain (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score, KOOS) pain subscale. The secondary outcomes are KOOS disability and quality-of-life, analgesic usage, global health change, knee active range of motion, 30 s chair stand, maximum painless isometric knee extension strength, knee pain pressure threshold and real-time ultrasonography-assessed suprapatellar effusion, meniscal neovascularization and femur cartilage thickness. All the outcomes are assessed 0, 3, 8, 26 and 52 weeks post-randomization, except for global health change, which is only evaluated at completed ST. This study features the blinding of participants, assessors and therapists, and will improve our understanding of what occurs with the local pathophysiology, tissue morphology and clinical status of persons with KOA up to a year after the initiation of ST and a higher 904 nm LLLT dose than in any published trial on this topic.publishedVersio

Short-and Long-Term Effectiveness of Low-Level Laser Therapy Combined with Strength Training in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial

Background: Both physical activity and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) can reduce knee osteoarthritis (KOA) inflammation. We conducted a randomized clinical trial to investigate the short- and long-term effectiveness of LLLT combined with strength training in persons with KOA. Methods: Fifty participants were randomly divided in two groups, one with LLLT plus strength training (n = 26) and one with placebo LLLT plus strength training (n = 24). LLLT and strength training were performed triweekly for 3 and 8 weeks, respectively. In the laser group, 3 joules 904 nm wavelength laser was applied to fifteen points (45 joules) per knee per session. Patient-reported outcomes, physical tests, and ultrasonography assessments were performed at baseline and 3, 8, 26, and 52 weeks after initial LLLT or placebo therapy. The primary outcomes were pain on movement, at rest, at night (Visual Analogue Scale), and globally (Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) subscale). Parametric data were assessed with analysis of variance using Šidák’s correction. Results: There were no significant between-group differences in the primary outcomes. However, in the laser group there was a significantly reduced number of participants using analgesic and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and increased performance in the sit-to-stand test versus placebo-control at week 52. The joint line pain pressure threshold (PPT) improved more in the placebo group than in the laser group, but only significantly at week 8. No other significant treatment effects were present. However, pain on movement and joint line PPT were worse in the placebo group at baseline, and therefore, it had more room for improvement. The short-term percentage of improvement in the placebo group was much higher than in similar trials. Conclusions: Pain was reduced substantially in both groups. LLLT seemed to provide a positive add-on effect in the follow-up period in terms of reduced pain medication usage and increased performance in the sit-to-stand test.publishedVersio