Therapeutic Efficacy of Home-Use Photobiomodulation Devices: A Systematic Literature Review
Gavish L, Houreld NN
Photobiomodulation, photomedicine, and laser surgery · 33 citas
Cómo se estudió
- Diseño
- Revisión sistemática (indexado por PubMed)
- Estudiado en
- Personas
- Resultado principal
- Marcadores de salud y funcionamiento
Quién lo pagó
- Financiación
- Financiación independiente
- Organización sin fines de lucro
- Rosetrees Trust
- Organización sin fines de lucro
- Rosetrees
- Subvenciones
- Rosetrees Trust (M140-F2)
Según 2 financiadores declarados.
Publicación
- Publicado
- 2019-01-01 · Photobiomodul Photomed Laser Surg · vol. 37 · número 1 · págs. 4–16
- Editorial
- Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
- Citado
- 41 citas · más que el 77% de estudios similares · 1.2× el promedio de su campo
- Referencias
- 42 trabajos
- Acceso
- De pago
- Áreas de investigación
- Laser Applications in Dentistry and Medicine · Biofield Effects and Biophysics · Photodynamic Therapy Research Studies
- Palabras clave
- low-level laser therapy, treatment efficacy, pain, cognitive impairment, wound healing, diabetic macular edema, near-infrared, treatment dosage
- MeSH
- humans, self care, low-level light therapy
2 autores
- Lilach Gavish🇮🇱 · autor de correspondenciaHebrew University of Jerusalem
- Nicolette N. Houreld🇿🇦University of Johannesburg
Resumen
El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.
Objective: Perform systematic literature review on photobiomodulation (PBM) devices used at home for nonesthetic applications. Background: Home-use PBM devices have been marketed for cosmetic and therapeutic purposes. This is the first systematic literature review for nonesthetic applications. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted for PBM devices self-applied at home at least thrice a week. Two independent reviewers screened the articles and extracted the data. Treatment dosage appropriateness was compared to the World Association for Laser Therapy (WALT) recommendations. The efficacy was evaluated according to the relevant primary end-point for the specific indication. Results: Eleven studies were suitable. Devices were applied for a range of indications, including pain, cognitive dysfunction, wound healing, diabetic macular edema, and postprocedural side effects, and were mostly based on near-infrared, pulsed light-emitting diodes with dosages within WALT recommendations. Regarding efficacy, studies reported mostly positive results. Conclusions: Home-use PBM devices appear to mediate effective, safe treatments in a variety of conditions that require frequent applications. Conclusive evaluation of their efficacy requires additional, randomized controlled studies.
Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial.
Confianza de la comunidad
Cargando…
¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?
Comentarios
¿Algo está mal aquí?
Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.
Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.