| Title |
LLLT for the management of patients with ankylosing spondylitis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Lasers in Medical Science, January 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10103-016-1874-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
D. Stasinopoulos, K. Papadopoulos, D. Lamnisos, A. Stergioulas |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of the combined low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and passive stretching with combined placebo LLLT laser and the same passive stretching exercises in patients suffering from Αnkylosing spondylitis. Forty-eight patients suffering from Αnkylosing spondylitis participated in the study and were randomized into two groups. Group A (n = 24) was treated with a λ = 820 Ga-Al-As laser CW, with power intensity = 60 mW/cm(2), energy per point in each session = 4.5 J, total energy per session = 27.0 J, in contact with specific points technique, plus passive stretching exercises. Group B (n = 24), received placebo laser plus the same passive stretching exercises. Both groups received 12 sessions of laser or placebo within 8 weeks; two sessions per week (weeks 1-4) and one session per week (weeks 5-8). Pain and function scales were completed before the treatment, at the end of the fourth and eighth week of treatment, and 8 weeks after the end of treatment (follow-up). Group A revealed a significant improvement after 8 weeks of treatment in all pain and function scales. At 8-week follow-up, the improvement remained only for the pain, while for all other function outcomes the differences were not statistically significant. The results suggested that after an 8-week treatment and after a follow-up, the combination of LLLT and passive stretching exercises decreased pain more effectively than placebo LLLT along with the same passive stretching exercises in patients with Αnkylosing spondylitis. Future studies are needed to establish the relative and absolute effectiveness of the above protocol. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 States | 4 | 36% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 27% |
| Canada | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 3 | 27% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 73% |
| Scientists | 2 | 18% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 127 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 18% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 13% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Researcher | 8 | 6% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 24 | 19% |
| Unknown | 39 | 31% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 33 | 26% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 30 | 24% |
| Sports and Recreations | 6 | 5% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 2% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 11 | 9% |
| Unknown | 41 | 32% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 16 July 2020.
All research outputs
#3,957,314
of 22,840,638 outputs
Outputs from Lasers in Medical Science
#77
of 1,310 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,206
of 394,770 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lasers in Medical Science
#4
of 43 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,840,638 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,310 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 394,770 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 43 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.