PTSystematic ReviewJournal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation2024

Devices used for photobiomodulation of the brain-a comprehensive and systematic review.

Filipa Fernandes, Sofia Oliveira, Francisca Monteiro and 5 others

PMID 38600582

WHAT IT FOUND

No standard brain photobiomodulation device or settings emerged across 97 studies.

The most common reports used continuous red to infrared light to the front brain area, but reporting was inconsistent, so no optimal procedure can be recommended.

Key findings

01No clear standard treatment procedure emerged for each neurological condition, although some parameter trends were noted.

02Laser handpieces were the most common device category, accounting for 39% of 109 reports.

03The prefrontal cortex was the most stimulated brain region, with 87 reports, and 810 nm was the most common wavelength, used in 26% of reports.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

This is a review of devices and stimulation parameters, not a trial that tested one treatment in patients. The review did not determine which parameters work best; the authors state there are no clear standard treatment procedures for each condition. 25% of the 97 studies had 10 or fewer participants. Important stimulation details were often missing: energy per session was missing in 52% of reports, energy density in 33%, power output in 30%, area of actuation in 26%, and mode of operation in 25%. Many outcome measures were neurophysiological and often not sham-controlled, so placebo effects cannot be ruled out. The included studies covered 23 health conditions and very different devices, so the trends are descriptive rather than a treatment recommendation.

Declared interests

Funded by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology and the European Regional Development Fund through COMPETE 2020. The authors declared no competing interests.

The easy way to misread this

Do not read the common 810 nm, continuous, front brain area settings as an effective protocol. The review only reports that those settings were used often, and it found no consensus on which parameters work.

Read it on PubMed →