top of page

Summary of The efficacy of low-level diode laser versus laser acupuncture

for the treatment of myofascial pain dysfunction syndrome (MPDS)

Hamid Reza Khalighi, Hamed Mortazavi, [...], and Fahimeh Anbari





(Ref ID): PMC8814725

Chosen Image filename:  PMC8814725_Figure_01.jpg


Document structure and format:


Title: Summary of Research Paper on “The efficacy of low-level diode laser versus laser acupuncture for the treatment of myofascial pain dysfunction syndrome (MPDS)”


I. Introduction


A. The research paper examines the effectiveness of two different treatment methods, low-level diode laser therapy (LLLT) and laser acupuncture therapy (LAT), for myofascial pain dysfunction syndrome (MPDS), the most common type of temporomandibular disorder.


B. The main research question is to compare the efficacies of LLLT and LAT in treating MPDS. The objectives include determining the pain intensity reduction, improvement in pain-free maximum mandibular opening (MMO), and evaluating changes in pain severity for different muscles of mastication.


II. Methodology


A. The study was a double-blind, single-center, randomized controlled clinical trial. 24 patients with MPDS were included, with 12 patients assigned to each treatment group.


B. Data collection involved measuring subjective pain severity using a visual analogue scale (VAS), pain-free MMO, and pain severity for each muscle of mastication. The data were analyzed using chi-square and Fisher's exact tests for qualitative data, and repeated-measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) for quantitative data.


C. The limitations of the study include the small sample size and the exclusion of patients with certain contraindications. There was also a limitation in blinding during the treatment process.


III. Results


A. The study found that both LLLT and LAT led to significant reductions in subjective total pain scores and improvements in pain-free MMO.


B. No significant differences were observed between the two treatment methods in terms of pain reduction, increase in MMO, and changes in pain severity for different muscles of mastication.


C. Statistical analyses, such as chi-square, Fisher's exact tests, and repeated-measures ANOVA, were used to analyze the data and determine the significance of the results.


IV. Discussion


A. The results showed that both LLLT and LAT are effective in treating MPDS, as evidenced by the reduction in pain intensity and improvement in MMO.


B. The findings have implications for the management of MPDS, providing clinicians with alternative treatment options that can be tailored to individual patient preferences.


C. Limitations of the study, such as the small sample size and the need for further research to confirm the results, are discussed. Areas for future research include investigating the long-term effects and cost-effectiveness of LLLT and LAT for MPDS.


V. Conclusion


A. In summary, the research paper compares the efficacy of LLLT and LAT for treating MPDS. Both methods showed significant improvements in pain intensity and MMO.


B. The findings of this study contribute to the understanding of alternative treatment options for MPDS and can guide clinicians in selecting the most suitable approach for their patients.

Fig. 1: Laser irradiation of a tender point of the masseter muscle in the low-level diode laser therapy (LLLT) group
Courtesy of PMC8814725


Rated 0 out of 5 stars.
No ratings yet

Add a rating
bottom of page