Table 4.
The frequency and the percentage of pinprick detection
| Evaluation session | Groups | Detected N.(%) | Non-detected N.(%) | Total N.(%) | p Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Before treatment | Control | 7 (53.8) | 6 (46.2) | 13 (100) | 0.899 |
| 810 nm laser | 8 (61.5) | 5 (38.5) | 13 (100) | ||
| 940 nm laser | 8 (61.5) | 5 (38.5) | 13 (100) | ||
| Total | 23 (59) | 16 (41) | 39 (100) | ||
| 1st session | Control | 7 (46.2) | 6 (53.8) | 13 (100) | 0.482 |
| 810 nm laser | 9 (69.2) | 4 (30.8) | 13 (100) | ||
| 940 nm laser | 7 (53.8) | 6 (46.2) | 13 (100) | ||
| Total | 22 (56.4) | 17 (43.6) | 39 (100) | ||
| 3rd session | Control | 7 (46.2) | 6 (53.8) | 13 (100) | 0.901 |
| 810 nm laser | 5 (38.5) | 8 (61.553.8) | 13 (100) | ||
| 940 nm laser | 6 (46.2) | 7 (53.8) | 13 (100) | ||
| Total | 17 (43.6) | 22 (56.4) | 39 (100) | ||
| 7th session | Control | 4 (30.8) | 9 (69.2) | 13 (100) | 0.892 |
| 810 nm laser | 4 (30.8) | 9 (69.2) | 13 (100) | ||
| 940 nm laser | 5 (38.5) | 8 (61.5) | 13 (100) | ||
| Total | 13 (33.3) | 26 (66.7) | 39 (100) | ||
| 12th session | Control | 8 (61.5) | 5 (38.5) | 13 (100) | 0.064 |
| 810 nm laser | 3 (23.1) | 10 (76.9) | 13 (100) | ||
| 940 nm laser | 3 (23.1) | 10 (76.9) | 13 (100) | ||
| Total | 13 (35.9) | 26 (64.1) | 39 (100) |
In this table shows the frequency and percentage of Pin Prick detection. In almost all sessions, patients treated with both types of lasers did not show less detection of Pin Prick in comparison to the control group. Only after the first session, patients in 810nm laser could detect Pin Pricks more than the other 2 groups