ArticleCureus2024
Low-Level Laser Therapy for Thumb Carpometacarpal Joint Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and aim Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is considered a promising non-invasive treatment option for osteoarthritis (OA). The current study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of LLLT on patients with OA of the first carpometacarpal joint (CMC1) of the thumb. Methods An open-level, prospective, randomized controlled trial was conducted in the Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Bangabandhu Sheikh Mujib Medical University (BSMMU), Dhaka, for one year. Initially, 120 patients were approached for the study. Among them, 112 eligible patients were randomly divided into two groups: the intervention group received LLLT in addition to conservative treatment, while the control group received conservative treatment alone for four weeks. Pain and functional capability (motor) improvement were assessed on a weekly follow-up basis by using various parameters such as the visual analogue scale (VAS), Ritchie articular index (tenderness scale), grip strength, key pinch strength, Dreiser functional index, and CMC1 palmer abduction. Eventually, 90 patients completed the follow-ups and were included in the analysis. Results The majority of patients diagnosed with CMC1 joint OA were in their fifties. At baseline, patients of both intervention and control groups were indifferent in terms of demography, pain intensity, motor responses, and duration of suffering. After four weeks of treatment, results indicated an overall improvement in both groups. However, the reduction of pain and increase in functional capability were not found statistically significant (p-value: ≥0.5). Conclusion LLLT with conventional treatment was not found significantly more effective enough than conventional treatment alone, but more well-designed clinical trials with larger sample sizes are needed to reach a definitive conclusion.
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.