Laser Acupuncture Versus Electroacupuncture for Nonsevere Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND

Electroacupuncture (EA) is commonly employed for carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS), whereas laser acupuncture (LA) seems to offer a safer and more convenient alternative. Nevertheless, transitioning from EA to LA requires evidence. This study aims to compare their clinical efficacy and safety.

METHODS

A randomized single-blind controlled trial was conducted on 76 CTS patients, with 38 patients assigned to receive EA (EA group) and 38 assigned to receive LA (LA group). Acupoints selected for both groups included PC4, PC6, PC7, PC8, LI4, LI10, LI11, HT3, HT7, and LU10. The intervention consisted of 20 sessions over 4 weeks. Symptom Severity Scale (SSS) and Functional Status Scale (FSS) scores, patients' satisfaction, and adverse events (AEs) were recorded.

RESULTS

The LA group demonstrated significantly greater reductions in SSS and FSS scores than the EA group, with mean differences (MDs) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) of -4.29 (-5.40 to -3.18) and -0.73 (-1.24 to -0.24), respectively, after 4 weeks of treatment. Complete symptom, functional recovery, and both were also significantly better in the LA group (relative risks [RR] [95% CI]: 14.00 [1.94 to 101.22], 1.58 [1.24 to 2.02], and 14.00 [1.94 to 101.22], respectively). Overall treatment effectiveness and satisfaction levels were notably higher in the LA group. Six patients experienced AEs in the EA group, whereas no AEs were reported in the LA group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the findings indicate that LA may offer a safer and more effective alternative to EA. Further studies with longer follow-up periods and assessment of electrodiagnostic changes after intervention are needed.