| Title |
A systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy of low-level laser therapy in the management of complication after mandibular third molar surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lasers in Medical Science, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10103-014-1634-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
W. L. He, F. Y. Yu, C. J. Li, J. Pan, R. Zhuang, P. J. Duan |
| Abstract |
The successful reduction of postoperative discomfort is of great significance. This review aims to evaluate the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) for the reduction of complication caused by impacted mandibular third molars extraction. An extensive literature search up to October 2013 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed through CENTRAL, PubMed, Embase, Medline, and CNKI. Six RCTs in which involves 193 participants are included in the meta-analysis. Among them, three RCTs exhibit a moderate risk of bias, while the other three show a high bias risk. Compared with placebo laser/control group, pain is significantly reduced with LLLT on the first day (mean difference [MD] = -2.63, 95 % confidence interval [CI] -4.46 to -0.79, P = 0.005). The superiority of LLLT in pain control persists on the second day (MD = -2.34, 95 % CI -4.61 to -0.06, P = 0.04) and the third day (MD = -3.40, 95 % CI -4.12 to -2.68, P < 0.00001). Moreover, LLLT reduces an average of 4.94 mm (MD = 4.94, 95 % CI 1.53 to 8.34, P = 0.004) of trismus compared with placebo laser irradiation in the first 3 days. On the seventh day, the superiority of LLLT also persists (MD = 3.24, 95 % CI 0.37 to 6.12, P = 0.03). In the first 3 days after surgery, extraoral irradiation (MD = -0.69, 95 % CI -1.30 to -0.08, P = 0.03) and intraoral combined with extraoral irradiation (MD = -0.65, 95 % CI -1.15 to -0.15, P = 0.01) reduced facial swelling significantly. On the seventh day, the intraoral combined with extraoral irradiation group (MD = -0.32, 95 % CI -0.59 to -0.06, P = 0.02) still showed benefit in relieving facial swelling. However, because of the heterogeneity of intervention and outcomes assessment and risk of bias of included trials, the efficacy is proved with limited evidence. In the future, well-designed RCTs with larger sample size will be required to provide clearer recommendations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 137 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 137 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 17 | 12% |
| Other | 10 | 7% |
| Researcher | 8 | 6% |
| Unspecified | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 30 | 22% |
| Unknown | 46 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 64 | 47% |
| Unspecified | 7 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 4% |
| Unknown | 50 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 21 February 2017.
All research outputs
#6,272,690
of 22,759,618 outputs
Outputs from Lasers in Medical Science
#194
of 1,307 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#59,599
of 230,235 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lasers in Medical Science
#3
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,759,618 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,307 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 230,235 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.