dc.contributorUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.creatorDe Abreu Venancio, R.
dc.creatorCamparis, Cinara Maria
dc.creatorDe Fátima Zanirato Lizarelli, R.
dc.date2014-05-27T11:21:39Z
dc.date2016-10-25T18:21:16Z
dc.date2014-05-27T11:21:39Z
dc.date2016-10-25T18:21:16Z
dc.date2005-11-01
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-06T01:15:09Z
dc.date.available2017-04-06T01:15:09Z
dc.identifierJournal of Oral Rehabilitation, v. 32, n. 11, p. 800-807, 2005.
dc.identifier0305-182X
dc.identifier1365-2842
dc.identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/68464
dc.identifierhttp://acervodigital.unesp.br/handle/11449/68464
dc.identifier10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01516.x
dc.identifierWOS:000232304700004
dc.identifier2-s2.0-27344453369
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01516.x
dc.identifier.urihttp://repositorioslatinoamericanos.uchile.cl/handle/2250/889801
dc.descriptionThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of low intensity laser therapy (LILT) in 30 patients presenting temporomandibular joint (TMJ) pain and mandibular dysfunction in a random and double-blind research design. The sample, divided into experimental group (1) and placebo group (2), was submitted to the treatment with infrared laser (780 nm, 30 mW, 10 s, 6.3 J/cm2) at three TMJ points. The treatment was evaluated throughout six sessions and 15, 30 and 60 days after the end of the therapy, through visual analogue scale (VAS), range of mandibular movements and TMJ pressure pain threshold. The results showed a reduction in VAS (p < 0.001) and through the ANOVA with repeated measures it was observed that the groups did not present statistically significant differences (P = 0.2060), as the averages of the evaluation times (P = 0.3955) and the interaction groups evaluation times (P = 0.3024), considering the MVO. The same occurred for RLE (P = 0.2988, P = 0.1762 and P = 0.7970), LLE (P = 0.3265, P = 0.4143 and P = 0.0696), PPTD (P = 0.1558, P = 0.4695 and P = 0.0737) and PPTE (P = 0.2376, P = 0.3203 and P = 0.0624). For PE, there were not statistically significant differences for groups (P = 0.7017) and the interaction groups evaluation times (P = 0.6678), even so in both groups the PE varied with time (P = 0.0069). © 2005 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
dc.languageeng
dc.relationJournal of Oral Rehabilitation
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subjectLaser therapy
dc.subjectLow intensity laser therapy
dc.subjectTemporomandibular disorder
dc.subjectTemporomandibular joint
dc.subjectTreatment
dc.subjectadolescent
dc.subjectadult
dc.subjectanalysis of variance
dc.subjectclinical trial
dc.subjectcontrolled clinical trial
dc.subjectcontrolled study
dc.subjectdouble blind procedure
dc.subjectfemale
dc.subjecthuman
dc.subjectinstrumentation
dc.subjectlow level laser therapy
dc.subjectmale
dc.subjectmethodology
dc.subjectpain
dc.subjectrandomized controlled trial
dc.subjecttemporomandibular joint disorder
dc.subjecttime
dc.subjecttreatment failure
dc.subjectAdolescent
dc.subjectAdult
dc.subjectAnalysis of Variance
dc.subjectDouble-Blind Method
dc.subjectFemale
dc.subjectHumans
dc.subjectLaser Therapy, Low-Level
dc.subjectMale
dc.subjectPain
dc.subjectTemporomandibular Joint Disorders
dc.subjectTime Factors
dc.subjectTreatment Failure
dc.titleLow intensity laser therapy in the treatment of temporomandibular disorders: A double-blind study
dc.typeOtro


Este ítem pertenece a la siguiente institución