↓ Skip to main content

Photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) and/or cryotherapy in skeletal muscle restitution, what is better? A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial

Overview of attention for article published in Lasers in Medical Science, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
5 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
171 Mendeley
Title
Photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) and/or cryotherapy in skeletal muscle restitution, what is better? A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial
Published in
Lasers in Medical Science, September 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10103-016-2071-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Paulo Roberto Vicente de Paiva, Shaiane Silva Tomazoni, Douglas Scott Johnson, Adriane Aver Vanin, Gianna Móes Albuquerque-Pontes, Caroline dos Santos Monteiro Machado, Heliodora Leão Casalechi, Paulo de Tarso Camillo de Carvalho, Ernesto Cesar Pinto Leal-Junior

Abstract

Cryotherapy for post-exercise recovery remains widely used despite the lack of quality evidence. Photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) studies (with both low-level laser therapy and light-emitting diode therapy) have demonstrated positive scientific evidence to suggest its use. The study aims to evaluate PBMT and cryotherapy as a single or combined treatment on skeletal muscle recovery after eccentric contractions of knee extensors. Fifty healthy male volunteers were recruited and randomized into five groups (PBMT, cryotherapy, cryotherapy + PBMT, PMBT + cryotherapy, or placebo) for a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial that evaluated exercise performance (maximum voluntary contraction (MVC)), delayed onset muscle soreness (DOMS), and muscle damage (creatine kinase (CK)). Assessments were performed at baseline; immediately after; and at 1, 24, 48, 72, and 96 h. Comparator treatments was performed 3 min after exercise and repeated at 24, 48, and 72 h. PBMT was applied employing a cordless, portable GameDay(™) device (combination of 905 nm super-pulsed laser and 875- and 640-nm light-emitting diodes (LEDs); manufactured by Multi Radiance Medical(™), Solon - OH, USA), and cryotherapy by flexible rubber ice packs. PBMT alone was optimal for post-exercise recovery with improved MVC, decreased DOMS, and CK activity (p < 0.05) from 24 to 96 h compared to placebo, cryotherapy, and cryotherapy + PBMT. In the PBMT + cryotherapy group, the effect of PBMT was decreased (p > 0.05) but demonstrated significant improvement in MVC, decreased DOMS, and CK activity (p < 0.05). Cryotherapy as single treatment and cryotherapy + PBMT were similar to placebo (p > 0.05). We conclude that PBMT used as single treatment is the best modality for enhancement of post-exercise restitution, leading to complete recovery to baseline levels from 24 h after high-intensity eccentric contractions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 171 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 <1%
Unknown 170 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 25 15%
Student > Master 21 12%
Researcher 20 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 7%
Professor 9 5%
Other 21 12%
Unknown 63 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 28 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 24 14%
Sports and Recreations 24 14%
Psychology 4 2%
Social Sciences 4 2%
Other 15 9%
Unknown 72 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 July 2021.
All research outputs
#14,732,908
of 25,587,485 outputs
Outputs from Lasers in Medical Science
#551
of 1,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,175
of 331,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lasers in Medical Science
#9
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,587,485 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,411 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 60% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 331,421 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.