The Efficacy of Low-level Laser on Cervical Myofascial Pain Syndrome
Is Low-level Laser on Traditional Acupoint as Effective as That on Trigger Point in the Management of Cervical Myofascial Pain Syndrome?
1 other identifier
interventional
100
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Objective: To compare the effectiveness of application of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) to trigger points and traditional acupoints for patients with cervical myofascial pain syndrome (MPS). Design: A single-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial Setting: University rehabilitation hospital Participants: One hundred and twenty one patients with cervical MPS Intervention: The investigators performed this experiment using low level 810-nm gallium aluminum arsenide (Ga-Al-As) laser. One hundred participants were randomly assigned to four treatment groups, including (1) acupoint therapy (2) acupoint control (3) trigger point therapy and (4) trigger point control groups. Main Outcome measures: The investigators evaluated the patient's visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores, pressure pain threshold and cervical range of motion (ROM) before and after the therapy.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for not_applicable
Started Feb 2011
Shorter than P25 for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
February 1, 2011
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
August 1, 2011
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
August 1, 2011
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
October 19, 2011
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
January 25, 2012
CompletedJanuary 25, 2012
January 1, 2012
6 months
October 19, 2011
January 24, 2012
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
1.pain scores
1\. pain score: visual analog scale (VAS)
10 minutes
Secondary Outcomes (2)
2. pressure pain threshold at the trigger point
10 minutes
3. cervical range of motion
10 minutes
Study Arms (4)
laser to acupoint
ACTIVE COMPARATORsham laser to acupoint
SHAM COMPARATORlaser to trigger point
ACTIVE COMPARATORsham laser to trigger point
SHAM COMPARATORInterventions
An infrared (the low-level laser, class IIIb) gallium aluminum arsenide (Ga-Al-As) diode laser device (MediUm-TECH Medizingeräte GmbH, Germany) with a wavelength of 810nm and a maximum power output of 150mW in the continuous wave mode
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- complaint of regional pain in the neck,
- presence of a palpable taut band,
- presence of a tender spot along the length of taut ban, and
- reproduction or enhancement of the clinical symptoms by compression of the active trigger point
You may not qualify if:
- cervical spine lesion, such as radiculopathy or myelopathy,
- fracture or surgery of cervical spine,
- cervical spine instability, and
- cognitive deficits or psychiatric illness
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Chang Gung Memorial Hospital
Taoyuan, 333, Taiwan
Related Publications (1)
Chang WH, Tu LW, Pei YC, Chen CK, Wang SH, Wong AM. Comparison of the effects between lasers applied to myofascial trigger points and to classical acupoints for patients with cervical myofascial pain syndrome. Biomed J. 2021 Dec;44(6):739-747. doi: 10.1016/j.bj.2020.05.020. Epub 2020 Jun 13.
PMID: 35166212DERIVED
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- STUDY CHAIR
Alice.M.K Wong, Professor
Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Taoyuan, Taoyuan, Taiwan
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- FACTORIAL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- professor
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
October 19, 2011
First Posted
January 25, 2012
Study Start
February 1, 2011
Primary Completion
August 1, 2011
Study Completion
August 1, 2011
Last Updated
January 25, 2012
Record last verified: 2012-01