Objective: the aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of photobiomodulation therapy (PBM) on perineal pain and wound healing following episiotomy. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and non-RCTs investigating PBM after episiotomy. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2 for RCTs and ROBINS-I for non-RCTs. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models. Results: Eight studies were included in the systematic review, and six studies were included in the meta-analysis. According to RoB 2, one trial was judged at low risk of bias, two trials raised some concerns, and three trials were at high risk of bias. ROBINS-I showed the serious risk of bias of two non-RCTs. GRADE for both pain and wound-healing outcomes was rated as very low. Meta-analysis of pain showed no significant difference between PBM and control groups (SMD = 0.04; 95% CI −0.60 to 0.68; p = 0.89), with considerable heterogeneity (I² = 91%). For wound-healing outcomes, meta-analysis showed no significant difference (MD = 0.94; 95% CI −0.69 to 2.56; p = 0.26), with substantial heterogeneity (I² = 94%). Conclusions: PBM therapy did not demonstrate a significant benefit for reducing perineal pain or improving wound healing after episiotomy compared with control interventions. Interpretation of these findings should be made cautiously due to small study numbers, substantial heterogeneity, and the inability to perform sensitivity or subgroup analyses, highlighting the need for high-quality RCT with standardized PBM protocols before clinical recommendations can be made.

Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the effectiveness of photobiomodulation (PBM) on pain and function in individuals with Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome (PFPS). Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Search was performed across PubMed/Midline, Scopus, Web of Science, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Wiley Online Library, Springer, Cochrane CENTRAL, PEDro, ResearchGate, and Google Scholar from inception to January 2025. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) examining PBM in individuals with PFPS were included. Data extraction, risk-of-bias assessment (RoB 2), and quality of evidence evaluation (GRADE) were performed independently by multiple reviewers. Primary and secondary outcomes were pain and function, respectively. A random effect meta-analysis was performed to estimate the standardized mean difference (SMD) at 95% confidence interval (CI) and overall effect size. Results: Eight trials (340 participants) met the inclusion criteria. PBM significantly reduced pain compared with the control (SMD = −0.83; 95% CI −1.40 to −0.27). Functional outcomes demonstrated a significant improvement favoring PBM (SMD = 0.68; 95% CI 0.08 to 1.27), although substantial heterogeneity was present (I² = 83%). RoB2 showed five high-risk studies. GRADE showed a very low quality of evidence due to study limitations, imprecision, and inconsistency which limit the confidence to the effect estimate. Conclusions: PBM, combined with exercise, provides improvements in pain and knee function in individuals with PFPS. While findings support PBM as an effective adjunct modality, standardized dosing protocols and larger, high-quality RCTs are needed to strengthen future clinical recommendations.

Background/Objectives: Patellofemoral pain (PFP) is a common and often persistent knee condition traditionally understood in biomechanical terms, though psychological factors are increasingly recognized as relevant. Pain catastrophizing has attracted particular attention, but most evidence relies on univariable associations, is drawn from female-dominated samples, and rarely tests whether catastrophizing relates to knee function after adjustment for other relevant factors. This study examined the associations between pain catastrophizing, perceived stress, body mass index (BMI), and knee pain history and knee function in physically active individuals with PFP, and whether catastrophizing remained associated with function after adjustment for the other included factors. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 55 physically active individuals with symptoms of PFP completed the Anterior Knee Pain Scale (AKPS), the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, and the Perceived Stress Scale. BMI and knee pain history were collected. Univariable analyses were followed by a multivariable model including all four prespecified predictors. Results: In univariable analyses, higher pain catastrophizing (β = −0.48, p < 0.001), higher perceived stress (β = −0.70, p = 0.004), and higher BMI (β = −0.58, p = 0.032) were each associated with lower AKPS scores. After adjustment, only pain catastrophizing remained significant (β = −0.36, 95% CI −0.60 to −0.11, p = 0.005). The final adjusted model explained 28% of the variance in AKPS scores. Conclusions: Pain catastrophizing remained associated with poorer knee function after adjustment for perceived stress, BMI, and knee pain history, suggesting that it may warrant consideration when assessing physically active individuals with PFP.

Authors would like to sincerely thank the authors of the commentary

Background/Objectives: Knee osteoarthritis (OA) is a prevalent degenerative joint disorder associated with pain, impaired proprioception, and reduced physical function. While closed kinetic chain exercises (CKCEs) are commonly prescribed to enhance joint stability, their weight-bearing nature may exacerbate symptoms. Graded weight-bearing exercises (GWBEs) using anti-gravity treadmill training provide a novel approach to reduce joint loading while maintaining functional mobility. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of GWBEs compared with CKCEs and open kinetic chain exercises (OKCEs) on pain, function, proprioception, and quadricep strength in patients with knee OA. Methods: Forty-five adults aged 40–60 years with radiographically confirmed knee OA were randomized into three groups: (1) GWBE + OKCE, (2) CKCE + OKCE, or (3) OKCE alone. Interventions were conducted three times per week for six-weeks. Outcomes included pain (Visual Analogue Scale), physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index, 6-Minute Walk Test), proprioception (joint repositioning error at 45°), and quadriceps strength (isokinetic peak torque at 60°, 120°, and 180°/s). Results: All groups demonstrated significant improvements in pain and function (p < 0.05). Proprioception improved in the GWBE + OKCE and CKCE + OKCE groups but not in the OKCE group. No significant changes were observed in quadriceps strength across groups. The GWBE + OKCE group showed significantly greater improvements in pain, function, and proprioception compared to both comparator groups (p < 0.05). Conclusions: GWBE combined with OKCE is more effective than CKCE + OKCE and OKCE alone in improving pain, function, and proprioception in patients with knee OA.