SynthesisLasers in medical science2025
Effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy in patients with spinal radiculopathy: a systematic review with meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Lasers in medical science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Efficacy of high-intensity laser therapy for patellofemoral pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Chiropractic & manual therapies · 2026Pooled it
- 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
- Clinical efficacy of ultra-laser irradiation combined with gabapentin on elderly patients with cervical spondylotic radiculopathy.Frontiers in neurology · 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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal radiculopathy (SRD) significantly burdens healthcare systems due to its complexity and resulting disabilities. High-Intensity Laser Therapy (HILT) is a promising treatment for managing SRD pain. The aim of this review is to assess the efficacy of HILT in the management of pain associated with SRD. A literature search across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, EBSCOhost, PEDro, and Google Scholar up to July 1, 2025, aimed to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing HILT with other therapies for SRD. The primary outcome focused on pain intensity using the visual analog scale (VAS), with secondary outcomes including disability with the Neck Disability Index (NDI), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and range of movement (ROM). RCT quality was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool (RoB2), and a meta-analysis employed the mean difference (MD) and the standardized mean difference (SMD). Evidence-based recommendations were provided with a GRADE approach. Eighteen studies were included-six on cervical and twelve on lumbar SRD-encompassing a total of 1,095 participants (555 received HILT; 540 were controls). The overall RoB was 38.9%, primarily due to shortcomings in outcome measurement and the randomization process. HILT significantly reduced pain when combined with physical therapy (MD = - 1.4 cm; 95% CI: - 2.1, - 0.7; p < 0.05) and compared to placebo (MD = - 1.8 cm; 95% CI: - 3.1, - 0.6). It also reduced disability, whether applied alone (SMD = 2.3; 95% CI: 0.3, 4.4), with physical therapy (SMD = 2.6; 95% CI: 1.0, 4.1), or with exercise (SMD = 0.9; 95% CI: 0.3, 1.5). For ROM, significant improvement was found only when HILT was combined with physical therapy (SMD = 1.1; 95% CI: 0.6, 1.6; p < 0.01). Although the evidence was considered important, its certainty was rated low to very low. HILT is more effective than placebo in reducing pain and disability in individuals with cervical or lumbar radiculopathy, particularly when combined with physical therapy or therapeutic exercise. Future RCTs should integrate therapeutic exercise and ensure greater methodological rigor, particularly through the standardization of outcome measures.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40719876What 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.