Trial reportLasers in medical science2026
Clinical outcomes of low versus high intensity laser therapy in patients with subacute carpal tunnel syndrome: A randomized, single-blinded, controlled trial.
Trial report in Lasers in medical science, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A common entrapment of median nerve that causes pain, numbness, and functional impairment is called Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS). Laser therapy is a noninvasive intervention for neural repair and pain modulation, but comparative evidence between Low-Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) and High-Intensity Laser Therapy (HILT) in subacute CTS is limited. The aims of this study were to compare the effects of LLLT and HILT on pain, functional status, electrophysiological, and ultrasonographic parameters in subacute CTS. A single-blinded randomized controlled trial (Reg. No. IRCT20241111063665N1) was conducted at the Department of Physiotherapy, The University of Lahore (UOL), Lahore, Pakistan, from August 2024 to March 2025. Sixty-nine participants with subacute CTS, confirmed by electromyography and nerve conduction studies, were randomly assigned to three groups (n = 23 each): Group A (HILT; 808 nm + physiotherapy), Group B (LLLT; 860 nm + physiotherapy), and Group C (physiotherapy + sham laser). Assessments were at baseline and week 6. Outcomes included pain (VAS), symptom severity and functional status (Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire; BCTQ), grip strength, distal motor latency (DML), sensory nerve conduction velocity (SNCV), and median nerve cross-sectional area (CSA). ANCOVA with Bonferroni correction and effect size estimation was applied. At week 6, both HILT and LLLT showed significant improvements (p < 0.001). HILT achieved greater pain reduction (- 4.9) than LLLT (- 4.1) and control (- 2.2; p < 0.001), with greater improvement in BCTQ-SSS (- 2.2 points), BCTQ-FSS (- 1.9 points), grip strength (+ 9.9 kg), DML (- 1.2 ms), SNCV (+ 12.3 m/s), and CSA (- 3.7 mm²). Large effect sizes (Cohen's d > 0.8) were observed. Both LLLT and HILT are effective as adjuncts to physiotherapy in subacute CTS. HILT demonstrated greater improvements than LLLT within the parameters tested.Clinical Trial Number: IRCT20241111063665N1, Registration date: 17 March, 2025.
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.