Trial reportPloS one2026
Efficacy and safety of invasive laser acupuncture (650 and 830 nm) on knee osteoarthritis: A pilot randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2026. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This pilot study explored the safety and efficacy of invasive laser acupuncture (ILA) using two wavelengths (650 and 830 nm) compared with a sham laser in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA). This randomized, parallel-arm, patient- and outcome assessor-blinded, placebo-controlled, single-center clinical trial was designed with three groups (control, 650, and 830 nm), and 45 participants were randomly allocated in a ratio of 1:1:1. All participants were treated with ILA on the more affected side at SP9, SP10, ST34, ST35, EX-LE2, EX-LE4, and GB34 for 10 minutes per session, twice weekly, for a total of 12 sessions over 6 weeks. The primary outcome was the change in pain visual analog scale (VAS) score at rest and during activity at baseline (Visit 1) versus 1 week after intervention completion (Visit 13). Secondary outcomes included VAS scores after six treatments (Visit 7) and 6 weeks after intervention completion (Visit 14), Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scores, European Quality of Life Five Dimension Five Level Scale (EQ-5D-5L), patient's global assessment, rescue medication dosage, and responder rate. Changes in the VAS scores at rest (p = 0.0044, Visit 13; p = 0.0001, Visit 14) and during activity (p = 0.0038, Visit 13; p < 0.0001, Visit 14) were significantly different among the three groups. Significant differences were also observed in WOMAC total (p = 0.0278, Visit 7; p = 0.0485, Visit 13; p = 0.0051, Visit 14), pain (p = 0.0073, Visit 7; p = 0.0210, Visit 13; p = 0.0038, Visit 14), function subscale (p = 0.0055, Visit 14), and EQ-5D-5L scores (p = 0.0131, Visit 14). No ILA-related adverse events or significant changes in vital signs or laboratory results were observed during the study. ILA at 650 and 830 nm showed preliminary signals of short-term pain reduction. However, these preliminary findings should be confirmed in larger, rigorously designed clinical trials.
trial registrationCRIS registration number: KCT0008860; registered on 10/11/2023 (https://cris.nih.go.kr/cris/search/detailSearch.do/25506).
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.