The effect of high-intensity versus low-level laser therapy in the management of plantar fasciitis: a randomized clinical trial

PubMed ID: 29627888We aimed to compare the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) in the treatment of plantar fasciitis (PF). Seventy patients were randomized into either the LLLT (8 men, 27 women; mean age 48.65 ± 10.81 years) or HILT (7 men, 28 women; mean age 48.73 ± 11.41 years) groups. LLLT (904 nm) and HILT (1064 nm) were performed three times per week, over a period of 3 weeks. Each treatment combined with silicone insole and stretching exercises. Patients’ pain and functional status were evaluated with Visual Analog Scale, Heel Tenderness Index, and Foot and Ankle Outcome Score before and after treatment. A chi-square test was performed to compare demographic and clinical characteristics. Within-group and between-group differences were also investigated. Paired samples t test was used to analyze the differences between baseline and after treatment values, while independent samples t test was used to compare the two groups. Both groups contained similar demographic characteristics including age, sex, and body mass index (all p > 0.05). Three and two patients in the HILT and LLLT group, respectively, were lost to follow-up. At the study onset, there were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in the Visual Analog Scale, Heel Tenderness Index, and Foot And Ankle Outcome Scores. Three weeks later, both groups showed significant improvement in all parameters (p < 0.05). The HILT group demonstrated better improvement in all parameters than the LLLT group. Although both treatments improved the pain levels, function, and quality of life in patients with PF, HILT had a more significant effect than LLLT. © 2018, Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature

Comparison of the efficacy of gabapentin and pregabalin for neuropathic pain in patients with spinal cord injury: A crossover study

Objectives: To compare the efficacy and side effects of gabapentin and pregabalin for the treatment of neuropathic pain(NP) in spinal cord injury (SCI). Methods: Twenty eight patients were included in the study. The patients were randomized to receive pregabalin or gabapentin. VAS(Visual analog scale) pain score, neuropathic pain scale(NPS), Lattinen test(LT), Beck Depression Inventory(BDI) pain diary measures were used for the patient evaluation. We assessed patients at 4th and 8th weeks. Treatment groups were crossed over after 2 weeks of wash-out period to receive the other treatment. Results: At the end of the study there was significant improvement in VAS both with gabapentin and pregabalin (p0.05). In NPS, and LT parameters, no difference was present between the two study groups before or after the treatment (p>0.05). In both groups no significant improvement was seen in emotional status as assessed with BDI (p>0.05). Frequency of side effects and exclusion from the study due to side effects were higher for the pregabalin group but it was not significant between the groups (p>0.05). Conclusions: It is concluded that both drugs are effective and safe for the treatment of NP due to SCI but no difference exist between the two drugs. We are in the opinion that large studies that include more patients and placebo control should be carried out for more accurate data about this topic

Study Group)

Objective: In this study, it was aimed to evaluate the relationship between vitamin D level and pain severity, localization and duration in patients with non-specific musculoskeletal pain.Materials and Methods: Patients who applied to physical medicine and rehabilitation outpatient clinics due to non-specific muscle pain in 19 centers in Turkey were retrospectively screened. Three thousand four hundred fourpatients were included in the study, whose pain level was determined by visual analog scale (VAS) and the painful region, duration of pain and vitamin D level were reached. D group was found to be D deficient (group 1) when 25 (OH) D level was 20 ng/mL or less and group D 2 (vitamin D deficiency) was higher than 30 ng/mL (group 3). The groups were compared in terms of pain duration, localization and severity. In addition, the correlations of pain localization, severity and duration with vitamin D levels were examined.Results: D vitamin deficiency was detected in 2202 (70.9%) of 3 thousand four hundred and four registered patients, and it was found that vitamin D deficiency in 516 (16.6%) and normal vitamin D in 386 (12.4%). The groups were similar in terms of age, body mass index, income level, duration of complaint, education level, family type and working status (p>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between groups in terms of VAS, pain localization and duration scores (p>0.05).Conclusion: Our study shows that vitamin D deficiency in patients with nonspecific musculoskeletal pain is not associated with the severity and duration of pain