Comparative Effects of Three Active Laser Therapy Protocols and a Sham Protocol on Neurophysiological and Functional Outcomes in Patients with Bell's Palsy: A Four-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial.

IF 3.3 3区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ahmed Eid Lafi Aljohani, Mahmoud Ewidea, Amr Abo Gazia, Yasmein Mohammad
{"title":"Comparative Effects of Three Active Laser Therapy Protocols and a Sham Protocol on Neurophysiological and Functional Outcomes in Patients with Bell's Palsy: A Four-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial.","authors":"Ahmed Eid Lafi Aljohani, Mahmoud Ewidea, Amr Abo Gazia, Yasmein Mohammad","doi":"10.3390/jcm15208113","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background/Objectives:</b> Although laser therapy is commonly used to manage Bell's palsy, optimal treatment parameters have not been established. The present randomized controlled trial compared three active laser therapy protocols with a sham-control protocol for neurophysiological and functional recovery in patients with acute Bell's palsy. <b>Methods:</b> The primary analysis included all 104 randomized participants (26 per group) and used multiple imputation for missing six-week outcomes, followed by baseline-adjusted pooled treatment comparisons. In this four-arm trial (NCT07519421), 104 patients were randomized (26 per group) to receive either a sham laser, 808 nm low-level laser therapy (LLLT), 980 nm LLLT, or 1064 nm high-intensity laser therapy (HILT). All participants received standard care, including corticosteroids, electrical stimulation, and facial exercises. Interventions were administered three times per week for six weeks. Compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude was the primary outcome; distal motor latency and the physical and social Facial Disability Index subscales (PFDI/SFDI) were additional outcomes. Eighty patients (20 per group) completed the six-week assessment and constituted the supporting complete-case analysis population. <b>Results:</b> In the primary intention-to-treat analysis, overall between-group differences were significant for CMAP amplitude (Wald χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 1844.49), distal motor latency (χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 284.90), PFDI (χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 359.44), and SFDI (χ<sup>2</sup>(3) = 842.37; all <i>p</i> < 0.001). The Group C complete treatment protocol was superior to the sham, Group A, and Group B protocols on all four six-week outcomes in Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons (all <i>p</i> < 0.001). The 80-participant complete-case analysis supported the general direction of these findings. An additional baseline-adjusted complete-case sensitivity analysis showed broadly concordant treatment estimates and pairwise inference. No adverse events were reported. <b>Conclusions:</b> Among the complete treatment protocols evaluated, the 1064 nm HILT protocol was associated with the greatest short-term improvements at six weeks. Because the active protocols differed in multiple treatment parameters beyond wavelength, these findings should not be interpreted as demonstrating superiority of the 1064 nm wavelength itself. Longer-term multicenter trials are needed to confirm durability and generalizability. The ITT estimates rely on a missing-at-random assumption for the 24 participants without six-week outcome assessments. Post-imputation diagnostic checks identified departures from regression assumptions, particularly for functional outcomes; inferential results should therefore be interpreted cautiously.</p>","PeriodicalId":15533,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","volume":"15 20","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13706096/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm15208113","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background/Objectives: Although laser therapy is commonly used to manage Bell's palsy, optimal treatment parameters have not been established. The present randomized controlled trial compared three active laser therapy protocols with a sham-control protocol for neurophysiological and functional recovery in patients with acute Bell's palsy. Methods: The primary analysis included all 104 randomized participants (26 per group) and used multiple imputation for missing six-week outcomes, followed by baseline-adjusted pooled treatment comparisons. In this four-arm trial (NCT07519421), 104 patients were randomized (26 per group) to receive either a sham laser, 808 nm low-level laser therapy (LLLT), 980 nm LLLT, or 1064 nm high-intensity laser therapy (HILT). All participants received standard care, including corticosteroids, electrical stimulation, and facial exercises. Interventions were administered three times per week for six weeks. Compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude was the primary outcome; distal motor latency and the physical and social Facial Disability Index subscales (PFDI/SFDI) were additional outcomes. Eighty patients (20 per group) completed the six-week assessment and constituted the supporting complete-case analysis population. Results: In the primary intention-to-treat analysis, overall between-group differences were significant for CMAP amplitude (Wald χ2(3) = 1844.49), distal motor latency (χ2(3) = 284.90), PFDI (χ2(3) = 359.44), and SFDI (χ2(3) = 842.37; all p < 0.001). The Group C complete treatment protocol was superior to the sham, Group A, and Group B protocols on all four six-week outcomes in Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons (all p < 0.001). The 80-participant complete-case analysis supported the general direction of these findings. An additional baseline-adjusted complete-case sensitivity analysis showed broadly concordant treatment estimates and pairwise inference. No adverse events were reported. Conclusions: Among the complete treatment protocols evaluated, the 1064 nm HILT protocol was associated with the greatest short-term improvements at six weeks. Because the active protocols differed in multiple treatment parameters beyond wavelength, these findings should not be interpreted as demonstrating superiority of the 1064 nm wavelength itself. Longer-term multicenter trials are needed to confirm durability and generalizability. The ITT estimates rely on a missing-at-random assumption for the 24 participants without six-week outcome assessments. Post-imputation diagnostic checks identified departures from regression assumptions, particularly for functional outcomes; inferential results should therefore be interpreted cautiously.

三种主动激光治疗方案和假激光治疗方案对贝尔麻痹患者神经生理和功能预后的比较效果:一项四组随机对照试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Clinical Medicine
Journal of Clinical Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
6468
审稿时长
16.32 days
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical Medicine (ISSN 2077-0383), is an international scientific open access journal, providing a platform for advances in health care/clinical practices, the study of direct observation of patients and general medical research. This multi-disciplinary journal is aimed at a wide audience of medical researchers and healthcare professionals. Unique features of this journal: manuscripts regarding original research and ideas will be particularly welcomed.JCM also accepts reviews, communications, and short notes. There is no limit to publication length: our aim is to encourage scientists to publish their experimental and theoretical results in as much detail as possible.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书