Table 2.
Characteristics of the studies included.
| Studies | Sample Size: N Total, Gender (M/F) |
Mean Age (Years) | Study Groups | Outcomes | Time Points | Relevant Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vestibulodynia | ||||||
| Leclair et al., 2007 [34] | 37 0/37 |
33 | (1) HILT (2) HILT then surgery (3) Surgery then HILT Comparator: N/A |
17-item survey designed by the authors | 2.8 yFU (1–6) |
68% of participants reported a decrease in the pain associated with vestibulodynia after HILT treatment. 63% expressed satisfaction with HILT treatment, and 38% stated that they would recommend laser therapy to a friend with the same problem. |
| Nonspecific Chronic Low Back Pain | ||||||
| Abdelbasset et al., 2020 [45] | 35 22/13 |
40 HILT 39 SL |
(1) HILT + EX (2) SL + EX Comparator: SL |
VAS, ODI PDI |
Pre Post |
Significant improvements in pain and function were observed in the HILT + EX group, whereas the SL group showed no significant changes. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: The HILT + EX group scored significantly better in comparison to the SL + EX group for pain and function. |
| Abdelbasset et al., 2020 [44] | 60 42/18 |
32 LLLT 34 HILT 33 EX |
(1) HILT + EX (2) LLLT + EX (3) EX Comparators: (1) LLLT Infrared, 850 nm laser with 800 mW power, 30 min/session, delivering 1200 J (2) EX home exercise training: strengthening exercises for back and abdominal muscles, stretching exercises for back muscles, at least twice per week |
VAS ODI |
Pre Post |
Significant improvements were observed in the HILT + EX and LLLT + EX groups in both pain and function, whereas the EX group showed no significant changes. Comparison between the three groups post-intervention: a significant difference in all outcome measures. Comparison between the LLLT + EX and HILT + EX groups post-intervention: no significant differences through post hoc analysis. |
| Abdelbasset et al., 2021 [46] | 51 Nr |
36 HILT 36 EMF 37 EX |
(1) HILT + EX (2) EMF + EX (3) EX Comparators: (1) EMF: 30 Hz pulse frequency, for 30 min/session, delivering 14 µT (2) EX: home exercise program: abdominal, back, pelvic muscle stretching, flexibility, mobility and strengthening, 3 x/week |
VAS, MODQ, PDI |
Pre Post |
Significant improvements were observed in the HILT + EX and EMF + EX groups in both pain and function, whereas the EX group showed no significant changes. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: The HILT + EX group scored significantly better in comparison to the EMF + EX group for pain and function. Within-group percent of change for pain and function were greater in the HILT + EX group when compared to the EMF + EX group. |
| Alayat et al., 2014 [35] |
72 72/0 |
33 | (1) HILT + EX (2) SL + EX (3) HILT Comparator: SL |
VAS, RDQ, MODQ |
Pre, Post, 12 wFU |
Significant improvements in both pain and function were observed in all 3 groups post-treatment and the results remained consistent at 12 w. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: The HILT + EX group had a larger decrease in pain than the SL + EX group, with the smallest effect experienced by the HILT group, at both 4 w and 12 w. HILT + EX showed a higher improvement in functional outcomes than SL + EX, while no significant difference was found between SL + EX and HILT alone. |
| Basford, 1999 [38] |
61 31/28 |
48 HILT, 48 SL |
(1) HILT (2) SL Comparator: SL |
VAS, ODI |
Pre, Post, 4 wFU |
Significant improvements in pain and function were observed in both groups. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: The HILT group scored significantly better in comparison to the SL group for pain and function. |
| Choi, 2017 [39] |
20 Nr |
48 HILT, 47 CPT |
(1) HILT+ CPT (2) CPT Comparator: CPT: 20 min; hot pack, 15 min. interference wave and 5 min; deep heat injection using ultrasonic waves 3 times per week for 4 weeks. |
VAS, ODI |
Pre, Post |
Significant improvements in pain and function were observed in both groups. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: The HILT + CPT group scored significantly better in comparison to the CPT group for both pain and function. |
| Conte, 2009 [40] |
56 Nr |
Nr (range 18–65) |
(1) HILT + EX (2) EX Comparator: EX: back school (upper and lower limb stretches, Klapp kneeling position, costal and diaphragm ventilation, muscle strengthening, exercises in front of the mirror to find neutral posture) |
VAS, MODQ |
Pre, Post |
Significant improvements in pain and function were observed in both groups. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: The HILT + EX group scored significantly better in comparison to the EX group for pain and function. |
| Fiore, 2011 [42] |
30 11/19 |
51 | (1) HILT (2) US Comparator: US: 2 W/cm2 for 10 min. |
VAS, ODI |
Pre, Post |
Significant improvements in pain and function were observed in both groups. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: The HILT group scored significantly better in comparison to the US group for pain and function. |
| Gocevska, 2019 [43] |
54 29/25 |
55 HILT | (1) HILT + EX (2) US + EX Comparator: US: 0.5 W/cm2 for 5 min. |
NRS, ODI |
Pre, Post, 12 wFU |
Significant improvements in pain and function were observed in both groups post-treatment and the results remained consistent at 12 w. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: The HILT + EX group scored significantly better in comparison to US + EX for pain and function at both post-treatment and 12 w. |
| Neck Pain | ||||||
| Alayat et al., 2016 [36] |
60 60/0 |
36 HILT, 25 SL |
(1) HILT + EX (2) SL + EX Comparator: SL |
VAS, NDI |
Pre, Post |
Significant improvements in pain and function were observed in both groups. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: The HILT + EX group scored significantly better in comparison to the SL + EX group for both pain and function. |
| Alayat, 2017 [37] |
75 75/0 |
46 | (1) HILT (MLS) +EX (2) LLLT + EX (3) SL + EX Comparators: (1) SL (2) LLLT Infrared, 830 nm laser with 800 mW power, 30 min/session, delivering 300 J |
VAS, NDI |
Pre, Post |
Significant improvements in pain and function were observed in all 3 groups. Comparison between the three groups post-intervention: The greatest improvement in both pain and function was seen in the HILT (MLS) + EX group, followed by LLLT + EX, then SL + EX. |
| Myofascial Pain Syndrome | ||||||
| Dundar, 2015 [41] | 76 0/76 |
40 HILT 38 SL |
(1) HILT + EX (2) SL + EX Comparator: SL |
VAS, NDI |
Pre, 1 wFU, 9 wFU |
Significant improvements in pain and function were observed in both groups. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: The HILT + EX group showed a greater improvement in pain and function than the SL + EX group. |
| Myogenic Temporomandibular Joint Disorder | ||||||
| Ekici et al., 2021 [47] | 76 Nr |
32 HILT 30 SL |
(1) HILT (2) SL Comparator: SL |
VAS, JFLS-20 |
Pre, 1 wFU, 9 wFU |
Significant improvements in pain and function were observed in both groups. Comparison between the groups post-intervention: Percentage changes yielded a significantly greater improvement in pain and function in the HILT group in comparison to the SL group. |
Legend: CPT: Conservative physiotherapy treatment; EMF: Pulsed electromagnetic field; EX: Therapeutic Exercises; HILT: High-intensity laser therapy; LLLT: Low-level laser therapy; JFLS-20: Jaw Functional Limitation Scale 20; MLS: Multiwave Locked System; MODQ: Modified Oswestry Disability Questionnaire; MT: Medical therapy agents; NDI: Neck disability index; ODI; Oswestry Disability Index; PDI: Pain disability Index; Post: After the treatment; Pre: Before the treatment; RDQ: Roland disability questionnaire; SL: Sham laser (placebo laser); US: Ultrasound treatment; VAS: visual analogue scale; NRS: Numeric rating scale; wFU: weeks of follow-up; yFU: years of follow-up; Nr: not reported.