Introduction. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are the main reason for disability in the world, causing pain and functional loss. Class IV laser is a recent treatment proposed for pain reduction in MSDs, although studies supporting its use and dosage are limited. The purpose of the paper was to describe the efficacy of class IV laser in the treatment of musculoskeletal pain. Methods. Randomized clinical trials were identified in the PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ScienceDirect databases by a search on August 31, 2020. Three independent investigators reviewed article titles and abstracts for eligibility. Risk of bias and quality were evaluated with the Cochrane risk of bias tool and PEDro scale. Decreased pain was considered the main outcome; range of motion, strength, or disability were secondary outcomes. Results. A total of 50 articles were obtained after eliminating duplicates, reduced to 7 after selection criteria application. MSDs included patellofemoral dysfunction (n = 1), epicondylitis (n = 1), osteoarthritis (n = 1), cervicalgia (n = 3), and lumbar radiculo pathy (n = 1). The studies had a low risk of bias and a PEDro score greater than 7. Pain reduction was observed at the end of laser treatments and in followup evaluations (p < 0.005); the decrease in disability favoured laser management (p < 0.005). Conclusions. Class IV laser is effective in reducing pain and improving function in patients with MSDs. Further research is necessary to establish a consensus on the dosage and obtain more evidence in MSDs of nonarticular origin.

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a strong impact on education, forcing the implementation of distance learning methodologies using information and communication technologies (ICT). The digital textbook is a didactic resource used to guide the training process of students; besides, its interactivity allows systematic work, favoring metacognition and the construction of self-learning. The aim of this paper is to describe, through a descriptive cross-sectional design, the design, review, digitalization and implementation phases of a digital textbook about physical agents as a learning resource to support distance education in the training process of physical therapy students enrolled in the physical agents course offered by Universidad Andres Bello in Santiago, Chile, in the context of the human mobility restriction measures implemented due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The textbook consists of thirteen thematic sections and once it was reviewed and validated by peers and by the editorial committee of the university it was digitalized and indexed into the digital resource database of the university, where it was made available to the entire cohort of students enrolled in the physical agents course during the first semester of 2020 (n=115).The digital textbook was successfully implemented as a didactic resource to guide the autonomous and distance learning of students during the time human mobility restriction measures were established in Chile due to the pandemic. Future studies should focus on reporting the students’ satisfaction and perception of this tool and its effect on learning outcomes in order to obtain effective feedback.

IntroductionTo investigate effects of ascending and descending direct current (ADC and DDC) on muscle strength evaluated with dynamometry. Muscle strength values in kilograms were compared in 3 groups (ADC, DDC, and control) before and after galvanic electrical intervention.MethodsA randomized clinical trial was performed in the Physiotherapy Laboratory of Andrés Bello University among 83 healthy volunteers. The intervention was a direct current session at an intensity of 4 mA for 12 minutes with 48-cm2 electrodes (dose: 48 mA · min; current density: 0.04 mA/cm2). The difference between the groups was galvanic therapy type applied. Current application followed a hand dynamometric test and myofeedback evaluation. The main outcome was maximum strength difference (MSdif) and its corresponding value in microvolts (μV-MSdif) obtained with myofeedback.ResultsThere were statistically significant changes regarding MSdif in groups who received direct current (<i>p</i> = 0.0001). These variations were also seen when comparing the 3 groups with the consideration of men (p = 0.0012) and women <i>(p</i> = 0.0021) separately. No statistically significant changes were observed in the μV-MSdif values (<i>p</i> = 0.9409).ConclusionsADC can generate variations in grip strength after an intervention session, with an increase in strength of 8.9%. The increase in strength was observed both in men (6.7%) and in women (9%) of the ADC group.

Effectiveness of high-intensity laser therapy added to a physical therapy program for the treatment of myofascial pain syndrome. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Adv Rehab. ( 2022), https://doi.org/10.5114/areh.2022.119498.

Introduction. Percutaneous electrotherapy is a therapeutic alternative in musculoskeletal conditions. Percutaneous micro electrolysis (MEP) stands out as treatment for tendinopathies and musculoskeletal pain, such as myofascial trigger points (MTrPs), although more studies are needed to support it. The study aimed to investigate MEP effectiveness in reducing pain pressure threshold (PPT) and pain intensity (Pi) in MTrPs. Methods. A randomized controlled clinical trial was performed at Physiotherapy Laboratory of Andrés Bello University and in volved 48 volunteers with MTrPs in upper trapezius muscle, randomly assigned to the experimental or control group. Both groups received baseline ultrasound treatment. in the experimental group, MEP intervention was applied with 3 reevaluation sessions (on days 1, 3, and 7). direct current was delivered with an acupuncture needle directly to MTrPs, and PPT and Pi were reevaluated before and after the application. The main outcomes were PPT and Pi differences (PPTdiff and Pidiff) between evaluation sessions. Results. TMEP implied positive changes, increasing PPT (PPTdiff11, p = 0.0000; PPTdiff21, p = 0.0000; PPTdiff31, p = 0.0000) and decreasing Pi (Pidiff11, p = 0.0001; Pidiff21, p = 0.0001; Pidiff31, p = 0.0008) in the experimental group. Significant differ ences were observed in PPT in the second reevaluation session compared with the control group (PPTdiff21, p = 0.0032). Conclusions. MEP is a good analgesic treatment for MTrPs compared with therapeutic ultrasound, although neither of these therapies seems to be better than the other in a long term. They improve PPT and Pi, so MEP can be considered effective alter native treatment for MTrPs pain.