CONTEXT: Recent studies suggest the prophylactic use of low-powered laser/light has ergogenic effects on athletic performance and postactivity recovery. Manufacturers of high-powered lasers/light devices claim that these can produce the same clinical benefits with increased power and decreased irradiation time; however, research with high-powered lasers is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the magnitude of observed phototherapeutic effects with 3 commercially available devices. DESIGN: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study. SETTING: Laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Forty healthy untrained male participants. INTERVENTION(S): Participants were randomized into 4 groups: placebo, high-powered continuous laser/light, low-powered continuous laser/light, or low-powered pulsed laser/light (comprising both lasers and light-emitting diodes). A single dose of 180 J or placebo was applied to the quadriceps. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Maximum voluntary contraction, delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS), and creatine kinase (CK) activity from baseline to 96 hours after the eccentric exercise protocol. RESULTS:Maximum voluntary contraction was maintained in the low-powered pulsed laser/light group compared with placebo and high-powered continuous laser/light groups in all time points (P < .05). Low-powered pulsed laser/light demonstrated less DOMS than all groups at all time points (P < .05). High-powered continuous laser/light did not demonstrate any positive effects on maximum voluntary contraction, CK activity, or DOMS compared with any group at any time point. Creatine kinase activity was decreased in low-powered pulsed laser/light compared with placebo (P < .05) and high-powered continuous laser/light (P < .05) at all time points. High-powered continuous laser/light resulted in increased CK activity compared with placebo from 1 to 24 hours (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Low-powered pulsed laser/light demonstrated better results than either low-powered continuous laser/light or high-powered continuous laser/light in all outcome measures when compared with placebo. The increase in CK activity using the high-powered continuous laser/light compared with placebo warrants further research to investigate its effect on other factors related to muscle damage.
RCT Entities:
CONTEXT: Recent studies suggest the prophylactic use of low-powered laser/light has ergogenic effects on athletic performance and postactivity recovery. Manufacturers of high-powered lasers/light devices claim that these can produce the same clinical benefits with increased power and decreased irradiation time; however, research with high-powered lasers is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the magnitude of observed phototherapeutic effects with 3 commercially available devices. DESIGN: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled study. SETTING: Laboratory. PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS: Forty healthy untrained male participants. INTERVENTION(S): Participants were randomized into 4 groups: placebo, high-powered continuous laser/light, low-powered continuous laser/light, or low-powered pulsed laser/light (comprising both lasers and light-emitting diodes). A single dose of 180 J or placebo was applied to the quadriceps. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Maximum voluntary contraction, delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS), and creatine kinase (CK) activity from baseline to 96 hours after the eccentric exercise protocol. RESULTS: Maximum voluntary contraction was maintained in the low-powered pulsed laser/light group compared with placebo and high-powered continuous laser/light groups in all time points (P < .05). Low-powered pulsed laser/light demonstrated less DOMS than all groups at all time points (P < .05). High-powered continuous laser/light did not demonstrate any positive effects on maximum voluntary contraction, CK activity, or DOMS compared with any group at any time point. Creatine kinase activity was decreased in low-powered pulsed laser/light compared with placebo (P < .05) and high-powered continuous laser/light (P < .05) at all time points. High-powered continuous laser/light resulted in increased CK activity compared with placebo from 1 to 24 hours (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Low-powered pulsed laser/light demonstrated better results than either low-powered continuous laser/light or high-powered continuous laser/light in all outcome measures when compared with placebo. The increase in CK activity using the high-powered continuous laser/light compared with placebo warrants further research to investigate its effect on other factors related to muscle damage.
Authors: Kelly A Larkin-Kaiser; Evangelos Christou; Mark Tillman; Steven George; Paul A Borsa Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2014-11-14 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Gianna Móes Albuquerque-Pontes; Rodolfo de Paula Vieira; Shaiane Silva Tomazoni; Cláudia Oliveira Caires; Victoria Nemeth; Adriane Aver Vanin; Larissa Aline Santos; Henrique Dantas Pinto; Rodrigo Labat Marcos; Jan Magnus Bjordal; Paulo de Tarso Camillo de Carvalho; Ernesto Cesar Pinto Leal-Junior Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2014-06-24 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Eduardo Foschini Miranda; Ernesto Cesar Pinto Leal-Junior; Paulo Henrique Marchetti; Simone Dal Corso Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2013-06-07 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Ernesto Cesar Pinto Leal Junior; Rodrigo Alvaro Brandão Lopes-Martins; Adriane Aver Vanin; Bruno Manfredini Baroni; Douglas Grosselli; Thiago De Marchi; Vegard V Iversen; Jan Magnus Bjordal Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2008-07-23 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Johny N Almeida; Wagner L Prado; Caio M Terra; Matheus G Oliveira; Renato A Garcia; Carlos E Pinfildi; João P Botero Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2019-06-14 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Shaiane Silva Tomazoni; Caroline Dos Santos Monteiro Machado; Thiago De Marchi; Heliodora Leão Casalechi; Jan Magnus Bjordal; Paulo de Tarso Camillo de Carvalho; Ernesto Cesar Pinto Leal-Junior Journal: Oxid Med Cell Longev Date: 2019-11-16 Impact factor: 6.543