ArticleLaser therapy2018
Effectiveness of Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) in the treatment of Lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET): an umbrella review.
Article in Laser therapy, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Effectiveness of High-Power Laser Therapy via Shear Wave Speed Analysis on Pain and Functioning in Patients with Lateral Epicondylitis: A Proof-of-Concept Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- TECAR Therapy Associated with High-Intensity Laser Therapy (Hilt) and Manual Therapy in the Treatment of Muscle Disorders: A Literature Review on the Theorised Effects Supporting Their Use.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Effectiveness of High-Intensity Laser Therapy Plus Ultrasound-Guided Peritendinous Hyaluronic Acid Compared to Therapeutic Exercise for Patients with Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- The effect of low-level red and near-infrared photobiomodulation on pain and function in tendinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized control trials.BMC sports science, medicine & rehabilitation · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this umbrella review is to determine the effectiveness of LLLT in the treatment of LET and to provide recommendations based on this evidence.
methodsA comprehensive and systematic review was undertaken using Medline, EBSCO and EMBASE. Systematic reviews or meta-analysis were included if they compared Laser with at least one of the following: (i) placebo, (ii) no treatment, (iii) another treatment, conservative (physical therapy intervention or medical) or operative of LET. Principal outcomes included the assessment of short and long-term effect on functional status, pain, grip strength (pain-free or maximum) and a global measure (overall improvement).
resultsSeven papers met the inclusion criteria for the umbrella review, Five papers were of moderate and two of low methodological quality. All reviews reported benefits associated with laser therapy Vs other intervention or placebo, however the significance of the identified benefits differed between studies and reviews. No review reported negative effects of laser therapy or harm to patients. All reviews noted significant variance between included studies with 2 reviews citing statistically significant heterogeneity. It is essential to consider this in the interpretation of these data.
conclusionThis umbrella review found poor results for the effectiveness of LLLT in the management of LET. Therefore, further research with well-designed RCTs is required to provide meaningful evidence on the effectiveness (absolute and relative) of LLLT for the management of LET.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.