A.M. El Sayed, E.S. Fayez, A.K. Mohamed, H.M. Elsayed
International Physical Therapy Conference Cairo University, 4(1) 1-18, 2025
Background: Among stroke survivors, hemiplegic shoulder pain (HSP) is a prevalent disorder that frequently hinders recovery and quality of life. There is considerable disagreement over the best therapeutic strategy despite the availability of therapy options. Although there is little direct comparative data, high-power laser therapy (HPLT) and pulsed electromagnetic field therapy (PEMF) are new non-invasive techniques with encouraging results.
Purpose: This study compared the efficacy of high-power laser therapy versus pulsed electromagnetic field therapy in treating patients with chronic hemiplegic shoulder pain in terms of pain reduction, shoulder function improvement, and range of motion enhancement.
Subjects & Methods: 42 stroke patients who had chronic HSP participated in a randomized controlled experiment. Group A got high-power laser therapy, Group B got pulsed electromagnetic field therapy, and Group C got standard exercises. The participants were divided randomly into three groups. Treatment sessions were given three times a week for four weeks. The Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) were used to evaluate shoulder function and pain, and digital goniometric was used to measure the range of motion of shoulder flexion, abduction, and external rotation.
Conclusion: All three interventions significantly reduced pain and improved function and range of motion. HPLT produced the highest percentage of clinical improvement, followed by PEMF, while conventional exercise showed the least improvement. Although statistical differences between groups were not significant, HPLT showed superior clinical outcomes and limited statistical superiority especially for HPLT over exercises in shoulder flexion active range of motion. These results suggest, HPLT may be a more effective treatment option for chronic HSP.
L'accesso alla visualizzazione dei prodotti e al materiale informativo è riservato agli operatori del settore in ottemperanza alla legislazione vigente. ASA richiede di qualificarsi come operatore del settore per procedere con la navigazione.
Decreto Legislativo 24 febbraio 1997, n°46 Articolo 21
1. E' vietata la pubblicità verso il pubblico dei dispositivi che, secondo disposizioni adottate con decreto del Ministro della Sanità, possono essere venduti soltanto su prescrizione medica o essere impiegati eventualmente con l'assistenza di un medico o di altro professionista sanitario.
2. La pubblicità presso il pubblico dei dispositivi diversi da quelli di cui al comma 1 è soggetta ad autorizzazione del Ministero della Sanità. Sulle domande di autorizzazione esprime parere la Commissione di esperti prevista dall'articolo 6, comma 3, del decreto legislativo
30 dicembre 1992, n. 541, che a tal fine è integrata da un rappresentante del Dipartimento del Ministero della Sanità competente in materia di dispositivi medici e da uno del Ministero dell'Industria, del commercio e dell'artigianato.
Some of the contents of this website cannot be disclosed in the USA and its territories and possesions, for regulatory reasons. If you are a US resident, please click on the button here below and access ASA's distributor website for North America.