Yousefi-Nooraie R, Schonstein E, Heidari K, Rashidian A, Pennick V, Akbari-Kamrani M, Irani S, Shakiba B, Mortaz Hejri S A, Mortaz Hejri S O, Jonaidi A
Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Centre for Academic and Health Policies, P.O. Box 13145-967, Tehran, Iran.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008 Apr 16;2008(2):CD005107. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005107.pub4.
Low-back pain (LBP) is a major health problem and a major cause of medical expenses and disablement. Low level laser therapy (LLLT) can be used to treat musculoskeletal disorders such as back pain.
To assess the effects of LLLT in patients with non-specific LBP.
We searched CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 2), MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, AMED and PEDro from their start to November 2007 with no language restrictions. We screened references in the included studies and in reviews and conducted citation tracking of identified RCTs and reviews using Science Citation Index. We also contacted content experts.
Randomised controlled clinical trials (RCTs) investigating LLLT to treat non-specific low-back pain were included.
Two authors independently assessed methodological quality using the criteria recommended by the Cochrane Back Review Group and extracted data. Studies were qualitatively and quantitatively analysed according to Cochrane Back Review Group guideline.
Seven heterogeneous English language RCTs with reasonable quality were included. Three small studies (168 people) separately showed statistically significant but clinically unimportant pain relief for LLLT versus sham therapy for sub-acute and chronic low-back pain at short-term and intermediate-term follow-up (up to six months). One study (56 people) showed that LLLT was more effective than sham at reducing disability in the short term. Three studies (102 people) reported that LLLT plus exercise were not better than exercise, with or without sham in the short-term in reducing pain or disability. Two studies (90 people) reported that LLLT was not more effective than exercise, with or without sham in reducing pain or disability in the short term. Two small trials (151 people) independently found that the relapse rate in the LLLT group was significantly lower than in the control group at the six-month follow-up. No side effects were reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on the heterogeneity of the populations, interventions and comparison groups, we conclude that there are insufficient data to draw firm conclusions on the clinical effect of LLLT for low-back pain. There is a need for further methodologically rigorous RCTs to evaluate the effects of LLLT compared to other treatments, different lengths of treatment, wavelengths and dosages.
腰痛是一个主要的健康问题,也是医疗费用和残疾的主要原因。低强度激光疗法(LLLT)可用于治疗诸如背痛等肌肉骨骼疾病。
评估低强度激光疗法对非特异性腰痛患者的疗效。
我们检索了CENTRAL(考克兰图书馆2005年第2期)、MEDLINE、CINAHL、EMBASE、AMED和PEDro,检索时间从各数据库建库起始至2007年11月,无语言限制。我们筛选了纳入研究和综述中的参考文献,并使用科学引文索引对已识别的随机对照试验和综述进行引文追踪。我们还联系了内容专家。
纳入调查低强度激光疗法治疗非特异性腰痛的随机对照临床试验(RCT)。
两位作者根据考克兰背部综述小组推荐的标准独立评估方法学质量并提取数据。根据考克兰背部综述小组指南对研究进行定性和定量分析。
纳入了7项质量合理的不同类别的英文随机对照试验。3项小型研究(共168人)分别显示,在短期和中期随访(长达6个月)中,与假治疗相比,低强度激光疗法对亚急性和慢性腰痛有统计学上显著但临床上无重要意义的疼痛缓解。1项研究(56人)表明,低强度激光疗法在短期内比假治疗在减轻残疾方面更有效。3项研究(102人)报告称,在短期内,低强度激光疗法加运动在减轻疼痛或残疾方面并不比单纯运动更好,无论是否有假治疗。2项研究(90人)报告称,在短期内,低强度激光疗法在减轻疼痛或残疾方面并不比单纯运动更有效(无论是否有假治疗)。2项小型试验(151人)独立发现,在6个月的随访中,低强度激光疗法组的复发率显著低于对照组。未报告有副作用。
基于人群、干预措施和比较组的异质性,我们得出结论,没有足够的数据就低强度激光疗法对腰痛的临床疗效得出确凿结论。需要进一步开展方法学严谨的随机对照试验,以评估低强度激光疗法与其他治疗方法、不同治疗时长、波长和剂量相比的效果。