Trial reportLasers in medical science2025
Effectiveness of low-power laser therapy and low-frequency ultrasound in reducing pain in patients with diabetic polyneuropathy: A randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to compare the efficacy of low-power laser therapy (LPLT) and low-frequency ultrasound (LFU) in reducing pain and improving quality of life in patients with diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN). A randomized controlled trial was conducted involving 55 patients with DPN, randomly assigned to three groups: LPLT (n = 18), LFU (n = 15), and control (n = 22). The LPLT group received treatments three times weekly for four weeks at 6 J/cm² using 808 nm and 905 nm wavelengths. The LFU group received treatments three times weekly for four weeks at 1 MHz, 0.5 W/cm², and 20% duty cycle. All interventions were administered alongside standard medical care. Baseline and post-intervention assessments included the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI) and Quality of Life in Diabetic Neuropathy (QOL-DN) measures. At baseline, significant differences were observed in patient-reported MNSI scores (p = 0.001), with the LPLT group reporting the highest scores. Post-intervention, all groups showed reductions in MNSI scores, but between-group differences were not significant (p = 0.292). The LPLT group exhibited the largest mean reduction (-2.39) in patient-reported MNSI scores, though the change only approached significance (p = 0.057). For QOL-DN, the LPLT group showed the greatest improvement in symptom scores (Mean=-2.55, p = 0.023) and problem scores (Mean=-7.05, p < 0.001). ANCOVA confirmed a significant group effect for QOL-DN problem scores (p = 0.007), with the LPLT group showing significantly greater improvement than controls (p = 0.006). LPLT may have potential for improving quality of life and neuropathy symptoms in DPN patients, but the limited between-group differences indicate that its clinical utility remains uncertain. Larger, multicenter trials with longer follow-up are needed to confirm these preliminary findings and establish clinical relevance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41320698What 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.