Primary study · included by 1 review
Is Low-level laser therapy and gaseous ozone application effective on osseointegration of immediately loaded implants?
Karaca 2018 · Karaca I R, Ergun G, Ozturk D N · Nigerian journal of clinical practice · 2018
Included by
| Outcome this study informs | Pooled effect | Evidence | Certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Implant stability (ISQ): association of energy dose with effect Adjunctive photobiomodulation vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 12 weeks | meta-regression coefficient -0.076 [-0.295, 0.143] | 6 studies | GRADE not reported |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 3 weeks | MD 1.95 [-0.31, 4.21] | 4 studies | GRADE not reported |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · baseline | MD 0.02 [-0.96, 1] | 12 studies | GRADE not reported |
Postoperative pain (VAS/NRS) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · baseline | MD -0.14 [-0.54, 0.26] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Postoperative pain (VAS/NRS) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 7 days | MD -0.1 [-0.37, 0.16] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Postoperative pain (VAS/NRS) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · all time points | MD -0.27 [-0.35, -0.19] | 6 studies | Moderate |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 2 weeks | MD 1.85 [-0.68, 4.38] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 9 weeks | MD 1.56 [-4.49, 7.62] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Postoperative pain (VAS/NRS) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 5 days | MD -0.29 [-0.38, -0.2] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 6 weeks | MD 2.95 [-0.15, 6.06] | 5 studies | GRADE not reported |
Postoperative pain (VAS/NRS) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 2 days | MD -0.31 [-1.2, 0.57] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Postoperative pain (VAS/NRS) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 3 days | MD -0.25 [-0.56, 0.05] | 5 studies | GRADE not reported |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · all time points | MD 1.26 [0.61, 1.91] | 13 studies | Low |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 6 months | MD 1.65 [-0.53, 3.83] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Postoperative pain (VAS/NRS) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 1 day | MD -0.35 [-0.66, -0.03] | 6 studies | GRADE not reported |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 7 days | MD 1.43 [-1, 3.86] | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 10 days | MD 2.27 [0.4, 4.13] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 4 weeks | MD 1.51 [-0.99, 4.02] | 3 studies | GRADE not reported |
Implant stability (ISQ) Adjunctive photobiomodulation (laser or LED) vs Sham or no photobiomodulation · 12 weeks | MD 0.89 [-0.78, 2.55] | 6 studies | GRADE not reported |
1 including review in total.