Cost-effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy for the prevention and management of cancer treatment toxicities: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To identify and summarize the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of photobiomodulation (PBM) therapy for the prevention and treatment of cancer treatment-related toxicities. METHODS: This systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE). Scopus, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Embase were searched electronically. RESULTS: A total of 1490 studies were identified, and after a two-step review, 4 articles met the inclusion criteria. The included studies analyzed the cost-effectiveness of PBM therapy used in the context of lymphedema for breast cancer and oral mucositis (OM) induced by chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Better outcomes were associated with PBM therapy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ranged from 3050.75 USD to 5592.10 USD per grade 3-4 OM case prevented. PBM therapy cost 21.47 USD per percentage point reduction in lymphedema in comparison with 80.51 USD for manual lymph drainage and physical therapy. CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence that PBM therapy is cost-effective in the prevention and treatment of specific cancer treatment-related toxicities, namely, OM and breast cancer-related lymphedema. Studies may have underreported the benefits due to a lack of a comprehensive cost evaluation. This suggests a wider acceptance of PBM therapy at cancer treatment centers, which has thus far been limited by the number of robust clinical studies that demonstrate cost-effectiveness for the prevention and treatment of toxicities.

Laser hair reduction for hidradenitis suppurativa warrants insurance coverage.

Hidradenitis suppurativa is a chronic, painful disease that significantly reduces quality of life. Laser hair reduction is one modality that can be used in combination with other treatments to ameliorate the condition. We argue that insurance should provide coverage for this necessary service.

Effect of photobiomodulation on the severity of oral mucositis and molecular changes in head and neck cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy: a study protocol for a cost-effectiveness randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral mucositis (OM) is the most frequent and debilitating acute side effect associated with head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment. When present, severe OM negatively impacts the quality of life of patients undergoing HNC treatment. Photobiomodulation is a well-consolidated and effective therapy for the treatment and prevention of severe OM, and is associated with a cost reduction of the cancer treatment. Although an increase in the quality of life and a reduction in the severity of OM are well described, there is no study on cost-effectiveness for this approach considering the quality of life as a primary outcome. In addition, little is known about the photobiomodulation effects on salivary inflammatory mediators. Thus, this study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of the photobiomodulation therapy for the prevention and control of severe OM and its influence on the salivary inflammatory mediators. METHODS/DESIGN: This randomized, double-blind clinical trial will include 50 HNC patients undergoing radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. The participants will be randomized into two groups: intervention group (photobiomodulation) and control group (preventive oral care protocol). OM (clinical assessment), saliva (assessment of collected samples) and quality of life (Oral Health Impact Profile-14 and Patient-Reported Oral Mucositis Symptoms questionnaires) will be assessed at the 1st, 7th, 14th, 21st and 30th radiotherapy sessions. Oxidative stress and inflammatory cytokine levels will be measured in the saliva samples of all participants. The costs are identified, measured and evaluated considering the radiotherapy time interval. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio will be estimated. The study will be conducted according to the Brazilian public health system perspective. DISCUSSION: Photobiomodulation is an effective therapy that reduces the cost associated with OM treatment. However, little is known about its cost-effectiveness, mainly when quality of life is the effectiveness measure. Additionally, this therapy is not supported by the Brazilian public health system. Therefore, this study widens the knowledge about the safety of and strengthens evidence for the use of photobiomodulation therapy, providing information for public policy-makers and also for dental care professionals. This study is strongly encouraged due to its clinical relevance and the possibility of incorporating new technology into public health systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials-ReBEC, RBR-5h4y4n . Registered on 13 June 2017.

Photomodulation in the treatment of chronic pain in patients with temporomandibular disorder: protocol for cost-effectiveness analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Epidemiological data show that the signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorder (TMD) start becoming apparent from 6 years of age, and during adolescence these signs and symptoms are similar to those of adults. The present study aims to estimate the direct costs for treatment of chronic muscle pain with photobiomodulation therapy, occlusal splint and placebo in patients with TMD; to evaluate the effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy and occlusal splint for treatment of muscle pain in patients with TMD; to analyse the cost-effectiveness of the two proposed treatments for pain; and to describe and compare the results of the analyses of these treatments. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a prospective trial of clinical and economic analyses that will include 135 patientswith TMD aged between 15 years and 25 years, randomly assigned to a treatment group: G1 (photobiomodulation), G2 (occlusal splint) and G3 (placebo). The analyses will be based on the cost of each treatment during the 12-month period. The outcome of the analysis of effectiveness will be pain, measured periodically by means of clinical examination of Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders. The cost-effectiveness ratio will be calculated using, as end points, pain and the ratio of the differences in costs between the groups studied. The evaluation of the impact of the treatment on quality of life will be determined by applying the adapted EuroQol-5D. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol has been ethically approved by the local medical ethical committee, protocol number 2.014.339. Results will be submitted to international peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03096301.

Use of low-level laser therapy in treatment of the androgenic alopecia, the first systematic review.

Alopecia is a common disease affecting more than half of the world total number of people. Alopecia exists in different types, but one of the most common of these types is the Androgenic Alopecia which has affected approximately 51% of the total number of males ranging between the age bracket of 40 years and 75 years. This type of alopecia is more common in females who are above the age of 65 years and above. Despite this widespread effect, much has not been done regarding identifying the possible drugs for treating this disease. At present, there exist only two possible medications that have been scientifically approved to cure this disease, include finasteride and minoxidil. Also, another possible form of treatment has been the case of hair transplantation. Despite the new possible treatment options available for treatment of different types of hair loss, there is a need for the invention for more efficient management and treatment options that are less costly, environmentally friendly, and most importantly human consumption friendly. Due to the recent evaluation that low-level laser therapy stimulated hair growth. This systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine whether the use of low-level laser therapy is an effective therapy for treatment of the Androgenic alopecia and also to some degree we reviewed the level of the patient's satisfaction. Some earlier studies had shown that the use of low-level laser therapy stimulated the hair growth when mice were treated with chemotherapy which was induced by the alopecia and also the other type of alopecia called alopecia areata. The researchers hypothesized that the primary mechanism of treating Androgenic alopecia to be the stimulation of the epidermal stem cells which are in the hair follicle making them bulge and shift the follicles into the anagen phase.

The effect of light-emitting diode (590/830 nm)-based low-level laser therapy on posttraumatic edema of facial bone fracture patients.

PURPOSE: Posttraumatic edema in facial bone fracture patients may interfere with the operation field and delay the schedule. Thus, swiftly reducing the edema alleviates patient discomfort and advances the operation date. Ice packing and compression bandages are often used for such a purpose, but such methods are often inconvenient for the face. In this study, we aim to analyze the effect of light-emitting diode (LED) (590/830 nm)-based low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in posttraumatic edema in facial bone fracture patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of 40 patients who were admitted to a single institution for facial bone fracture. The patients were divided into two groups of 20 each, treated either with LLLT or with sham treatment light. We used an LLLT device that consists of planar LED-based arrays with double wavelengths 590 nm and 830 nm. The patients were treated with either true or sham light from posttraumatic day 1-5, twice a day. After each treatment, the volume of a patient's face was measured with a 3-dimensional camera. We analyzed and compared the changes in facial edema. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was conducted for statistical comparison of the two groups, and significance was set to the level of p < 0.05. RESULTS: The sex ratio and mean age of the two groups were of little difference. The fracture sites included the nasal bone, orbital wall, zygomaticomaxillary bone, mandible, and frontal sinus. Mechanisms of injury included fall, assault, traffic accident, sports, and gunshot. The total operation rate of both groups was equal to 85%. Our analysis showed a 16.5% reduction of edema in the LLLT group and 7.3% in the sham light group. The edema reduction was statistically significantly greater in the LLLT group than in the sham light group (p < 0.047). CONCLUSION: LED-based LLLT is recently receiving attention worldwide for its cost-effectiveness and large coverage area compared to traditional laser therapy. Recent studies support its effectiveness in various areas such as wound healing, skin rejuvenation, and pain alleviation. In this study, we treated facial bone fracture patients with LED-based LLLT, and showed its effectiveness in reducing posttraumatic edema.

A systematic review of low-level light therapy for treatment of diabetic foot ulcer.

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a significant international health concern affecting more than 387 million individuals. A diabetic person has a 25% lifetime risk of developing a diabetic foot ulcer (DFU), leading to limb amputation in up to one in six DFU patients. Low-level light therapy (LLLT) uses low-power lasers or light-emitting diodes to alter cellular function and molecular pathways, and may be a promising treatment for DFU. The goal of this systematic review is to examine whether the clinical use of LLLT is effective in the healing of DFU at 12 and 20 weeks in comparison with the standard of care, and to provide evidence-based recommendation and future clinical guidelines for the treatment of DFU using LLLT. On September 30, 2015, we searched PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases using the following terms: "diabetic foot" AND "low level light therapy," OR "light emitting diode," OR "phototherapy," OR "laser." The relevant articles that met the following criteria were selected for inclusion: randomized control trials (RCTs) that investigated the use of LLLT for treatment of DFU. Four RCTs involving 131 participants were suitable for inclusion based upon our criteria. The clinical trials used sham irriadiation, low dose, or nontherapeutic LLLT as placebo or control in comparison to LLLT. The endpoints included ulcer size and time to complete healing with follow-up ranging from 2 to 16 weeks. Each article was assigned a level of evidence (LOE) and graded according to the Oxford Center for Evidence-based Medicine Levels of Evidence Grades of Recommendation criteria. Limitations of reviewed RCTs include a small sample size (N < 100), unclear allocation concealment, lack of screening phase to exclude rapid healers, unclear inclusion/exclusion criteria, short (<30 days) follow-up period, and unclear treatment settings (wavelength and treatment time). However, all reviewed RCTs demonstrated therapeutic outcomes with no adverse events using LLLT for treatment of DFU. This systematic review reports that LLLT has significant potential to become a portable, minimally invasive, easy-to-use, and cost effective modality for treatment of DFU. To enthusiastically recommend LLLT for treatment of DFU, additional studies with comparable laser parameters, screening period to exclude rapid healers, larger sample sizes and longer follow-up periods are required. We envision future stringent RCTs may validate LLLT for treatment of DFU. Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO CRD42015029825.

Cost-effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) in head and neck cancer patients receiving concurrent chemoradiation.

BACKGROUND: Oral mucositis is a major event increasing treatment costs of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients treated with chemoradiation (CRT). This study was designed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) to prevent oral mucositis in HNSCC patients receiving CRT. METHODS: From June 2007 to December 2010, 94 patients with HNSCC of nasopharynx, oropharynx, and hypopharynx entered a prospective, randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial. CRT consisted of conventional radiotherapy (RT: 70.2 Gy, 1.8 Gy/d, 5 times/wk)+concurrent cisplatin (100mg/m2) every 3 weeks. An InGaAlP (660 nm-100 mW-4J/cm2) laser diode was used for LLLT. RESULTS: From the perspective of Brazil's public health care system (SUS), total costs were higher in Placebo Group (PG) than Laser Group (LG) for opioid use (LG=US$ 9.08, PG=US$ 44.28), gastrostomy feeding (LG=US$ 50.50, PG=US$ 129.86), and hospitalization (PG=US$ 77.03). In LG, the cost was higher for laser therapy only (US$ 1880.57). The total incremental cost associated with the use of LLLT was US$ 1689.00 per patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was US$ 4961.37 per grade 3-4 OM case prevented compared to no treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that morbidity was lower in the Laser Group and that LLLT was more cost-effective than placebo up to a threshold of at least US$ 5000 per mucositis case prevented. CLINICAL TRIAL INFORMATION: NCT01439724.

COST-EFFECTIVENESS OF RADIOFREQUENCY ABLATION VERSUS LASER FOR VARICOSE VEINS.

OBJECTIVES: Although the clinical benefits of endovenous thermal ablation are widely recognized, few studies have evaluated the health economic implications of different treatments. This study compares 6-month clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) compared with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in the setting of a randomized clinical trial. METHODS: Patients with symptomatic primary varicose veins were randomized to EVLA or RFA and followed up for 6 months to evaluate clinical improvements, health related quality of life (HRQOL) and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients were randomized, of which 110 attended 6-month follow-up (EVLA n = 54; RFA n = 56). Improvements in quality of life (AVVQ and SF-12v2) and Venous Clinical Severity Scores (VCSS) achieved at 6 weeks were maintained at 6 months, with no significant difference detected between treatment groups. There were no differences in treatment failure rates. There were small differences in favor of EVLA in terms of costs and 6-month HRQOL but these were not statistically significant. However, RFA is associated with less pain at up to 10 days. CONCLUSIONS: EVLA and RFA result in comparable and significant gains in quality of life and clinical improvements at 6 months, compared with baseline values. EVLA is more likely to be cost-effective than RFA but absolute differences in costs and HRQOL are small.

What is the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of conservative interventions for tendinopathy? An overview of systematic reviews of clinical effectiveness and systematic review of economic evaluations.

BACKGROUND: Lateral elbow tendinopathy (LET) is a common complaint causing characteristic pain in the lateral elbow and upper forearm, and tenderness of the forearm extensor muscles. It is thought to be an overuse injury and can have a major impact on the patient's social and professional life. The condition is challenging to treat and prone to recurrent episodes. The average duration of a typical episode ranges from 6 to 24 months, with most (89%) reporting recovery by 1 year. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aims to summarise the evidence concerning the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of conservative interventions for LET. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search was conducted from database inception to 2012 in a range of databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Databases. METHODS AND OUTCOMES: We conducted an overview of systematic reviews to summarise the current evidence concerning the clinical effectiveness and a systematic review for the cost-effectiveness of conservative interventions for LET. We identified additional randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that could contribute further evidence to existing systematic reviews. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library and other important databases from inception to January 2013. RESULTS: A total of 29 systematic reviews published since 2003 matched our inclusion criteria. These were quality appraised using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) checklist; five were considered high quality and evaluated using a Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach. A total of 36 RCTs were identified that were not included in a systematic review and 29 RCTs were identified that had only been evaluated in an included systematic review of intermediate/low quality. These were then mapped to existing systematic reviews where further evidence could provide updates. Two economic evaluations were identified. LIMITATIONS: The summary of findings from the review was based only on high-quality evidence (scoring of > 5 AMSTAR). Other limitations were that identified RCTs were not quality appraised and dichotomous outcomes were also not considered. Economic evaluations took effectiveness estimates from trials that had small sample sizes leading to uncertainty surrounding the effect sizes reported. This, in turn, led to uncertainty of the reported cost-effectiveness and, as such, no robust recommendations could be made in this respect. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical effectiveness evidence from the high-quality systematic reviews identified in this overview continues to suggest uncertainty as to the effectiveness of many conservative interventions for the treatment of LET. Although new RCT evidence has been identified with either placebo or active controls, there is uncertainty as to the size of effects reported within them because of the small sample size. Conclusions regarding cost-effectiveness are also unclear. We consider that, although updated or new systematic reviews may also be of value, the primary focus of future work should be on conducting large-scale, good-quality clinical trials using a core set of outcome measures (for defined time points) and appropriate follow-up. Subgroup analysis of existing RCT data may be beneficial to ascertain whether or not certain patient groups are more likely to respond to treatments. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42013003593. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Cost-effectiveness of the introduction of specialized oral care with laser therapy in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

Oral mucositis (OM) is one of the side effects of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), resulting in major morbidity. The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of the introduction of a specialized oral care program including laser therapy in the care of patients receiving HSCT with regard to morbidity associated with OM. Clinical information was gathered on 167 patients undergoing HSCT and divided according to the presence (n = 91) or absence (n = 76) of laser therapy and oral care. Cost analysis included daily hospital fees, parenteral nutrition (PN) and prescription of opioids. It was observed that the group without laser therapy (group II) showed a higher frequency of severe degrees of OM (relative risk = 16.8, 95% confidence interval -5.8 to 48.9, p < 0.001), with a significant association between this severity and the use of PN (p = 0.001), prescription of opioids (p < 0.001), pain in the oral cavity (p = 0.003) and fever > 37.8°C (p = 0.005). Hospitalization costs in this group were up to 30% higher. The introduction of oral care by a multidisciplinary staff including laser therapy helps reduce morbidity resulting from OM and, consequently, helps minimize hospitalization costs associated with HSCT, even considering therapy costs.

Patient perspectives on low level light therapy and laser therapies for rosacea-associated persistent facial redness.

INTRODUCTION: There are no definitive treatments of facial redness for rosacea. All treatments aim to alleviate symptoms. Patients' perspectives of two emerging modalities, Low level light therapy and laser treatments are not well characterized. The purpose is to further understand rosacea patients unmet needs about these modalities, Methods: The publicly accessible, online rosacea forum was accessed at august 2013. Stratified random sampling method has done to identify a 10% sample of total 27,051 posts. The Posts were published in the "Laser and IPL therapy" and "Low level light therapy" forums were qualitatively analyzed. RESULTS: Patients discussed a variety of topics, but most commonly discussed effectiveness (34.2%), treatment education (19.3%), and adverse effects (18%). Relationship with the health care provider (9.9%), cost (8.1%), execution of treatments (8.1%) and convenience of treatments (2.5%) were less commonly discussed, but contributed to patients' decisions about utilizing laser and light therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Online forums are utilized to fulfill patients' desire for educational, empathic and collaborative relationship. Patients' adherence to laser and light therapies will likely increase if costs are reduced, reduction in redness is consistent with their expectations, and if physicians empower them through education on device choices and managing adverse effects.

[Free versus non-free treatments with laser and intense pulsed light in dermatology: distinguishing medical laser treatments to be provided free of charge from cosmetic self-payment treatments]. / Dermatologisk behandling med laser og intenst pulserende lys: afgraensning af medicinske vederlagsfri versus kosmetiske ikkevederlagsfri behandlinger.

Lasers and light sources are increasingly used in dermatology. Due to the limited financial resources of the public health care system, the Danish Dermatological Society has developed recommendations for distinguishing medical laser treatments to be provided free of charge from cosmetic self-payment treatments. Several considerations underlie the recommendations: present legislation; the diagnosis, etiology, severity, and anatomical location of the disease; and the availability of evidence-based treatments. It is suggested that the recommendations constitute the basis for referring patients to dermatological treatment involving laser and intense pulsed light in Denmark.