Efficacy of low-level laser therapy associated to orthoses for patients with carpal tunnel syndrome: A randomized single-blinded controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Compare the efficacy of orthoses and patient education with and without the addition to Low-Level Laser Therapy (LLLT - 660 nm, 30 mW, a continuous regime and bean area of 0.06 cm2). The laser irradiation was delivered with the fluency of 10J/cm2 in patients with mild and moderate Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS). METHODS: 48 patients were randomized and 30 finished the protocol (a sample loss of 37.5%), 90% female and 10% males. Randomization was applied to allocate the patients in each one of the groups, with association or not to LLLT (group orthoses or LLLT and orthoses). All of them were submitted to ergonomic home orientations. The short-term symptoms and function outcome were assessed through: Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire (BCTQ) - Severity of Symptoms (SS) Functional Score (FS). Pain (VAS), Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments, 2PD and pinch strength was used for characterization of the sample. Most of the participants were women, over 4th decade enrolled on heavy hand duties occupations, right-handed, 66.7% affected on dominant hand, without alterations in sensory median nerve thresholds or pinch strength. RESULTS: Both groups showed a reduction of total BCTQ score and its subdomains after six weeks, with significant difference (p< 0.05), comparing to baseline. No significant difference was found between groups. A Minimal clinical change was observed after the intervention in 92.3% of participants for BCTQ subdomain severity of symptoms at individual comparison for LLLT and orthoses group and 76.5% for the orthoses group, demonstrating clinical relevance. Effect size Cohen's index was moderate for the severity of symptoms. CONCLUSION: LLLT in association to orthoses and ergonomic orientation seems to be effective in short-term symptoms relieve for patients with mild and moderate CTS.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".