ArticleSaudi journal of medicine & medical sciences
Efficacy of Low-level Laser Versus High-intensity Laser Therapy in the Management of Adhesive Capsulitis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in Saudi journal of medicine & medical sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05469672 (The Effect of Low-level Laser Versus High-intensity Laser Therapy in the Management of Adhesive Capsulitis), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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.
The Effect of Low-level Laser Versus High-intensity Laser Therapy in the Management of Adhesive Capsulitis: a Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of the effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy versus low-level laser therapy in musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Lasers in medical science · 2026Pooled it
- The importance of power in photobiomodulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of high-intensity laser therapy.Frontiers in integrative neuroscience · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy in the management of neck pain.Lasers in medical science · 2024Pooled it
- Effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy in the treatment of patients with frozen shoulder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Lasers in medical science · 2023Pooled it
- Functional and ultrasonographic evaluation of high intensity laser therapy and Kinesio taping in stroke patients with hemiplegic shoulder pain: a randomized controlled trial.Lasers in medical science · 2026Trial
- Effects of low-level laser therapy on symptomatic calcific rotator cuff tendinopathy : A prospective randomized controlled study.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2025Trial
- Comparison of low-level laser therapy versus neuromuscular electrical nerve stimulation at hemiplegic shoulder pain and upper extremity functions.Lasers in medical science · 2025Trial
- Effectiveness of a high-intensity laser for improving hemiplegic shoulder dysfunction: a randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2024Trial
- Frozen shoulder: a narrative review of current treatment concepts and the underlying scientific evidence.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2025Article
- Comments on "high-intensity versus low-level laser in musculoskeletal disorders".Lasers in medical science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) are effective in alleviating pain and improving functionality in patients with adhesive capsulitis (AC); however, no study has compared the efficacy of these two laser treatments. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of LLLT and HILT in improving the shoulder joint range of motion and functional status and in reducing pain level in patients with AC. Trial Design: Prospective, randomized, parallel group, patient- and assessor-blinded. Methods: A total of 45 patients (aged: 18-65 years) with complaint of shoulder pain were evaluated for inclusion criteria, which included being aged 18-65 years and a diagnosis of AC based on physical examinations. Using computer-generated random numbers, eligible patients were randomized into two groups: HILT + stretching exercise and LLLT + stretching exercise groups. Both HILT and LLLT were performed three times/week for 3 weeks. Functional status and pain of the patients were evaluated with Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS), while shoulder joint range of motion was measured with goniometry. All assessments were done before and 3 weeks after treatment. Results: A total of 40 patients (20 in each group) completed the study. At baseline, there was no statistically significant difference in the demographic and clinical characteristics between both groups. Both the LLLT and HILT groups showed significant improvement in the VAS and SPADI scores 3 weeks after treatment; however, the improvement was significantly higher in the HILT group than the LLLT group. There was no significant improvement in goniometric scores in both groups compared with baseline. No injury or other musculoskeletal complications were recorded during or after the treatments. Conclusion: HILT + stretching exercise treatment was more effective than LLLT + stretching exercise for improving functional parameters and pain in patients with AC. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05469672. Funding: None.
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.