Exploring the efficacy of low-level laser therapy and exercise for knee osteoarthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Knee Osteoarthritis (KOA) is a prevalent, chronic disorder with excessive functional, social and economic burdens. The goal of treatment is to alleviate the symptoms and slow the progression. Documenting the effects of exercise and LLLT as co-modalities in the management of KOA allows practitioners to implement this management tool as part of KOA rehabilitation, resulting in the earlier discharge from a supervised rehabilitation setting. Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in the treatment of knee osteoarthritis (KOA). A randomised controlled trial (RCT) was conducted on 111 participants (aged between 40-75 years) diagnosed with KOA. Participants were randomised into an exercise (n=39), LLLT (n=40), or a combined exercise-LLLT (n=32) group. Methods: The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) scale was used to assess pain and functionality. Knee range of motion was assessed using a goniometer, and the one-minute timed sit-to-stand test measured physical functionality at four time points: (T1) baseline, (T2) post 12-session intervention, (T3) one-month post intervention and (T4) three-month's post intervention. Knee circumference was measured using a measuring tape. Results: WOMAC pain and functionality scale and knee circumference scores decreased in all three groups (P<0.05), but the combined exercise-LLLT group demonstrated better outcomes than the LLLT or exercise alone groups respectively. The combined exercise-LLLT group showed better acute and long-term benefits with participants experiencing a 3.5 centimetre decrease in knee circumference, 24 point improvement in the WOMAC pain and functionality scale, and a four repetition increase in physical functionality. Conclusion: The findings suggest that LLLT is a viable tool for managing KOA when used in conjunction with physical exercise.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".