Conventional, High-Intensity Laser, and Magnetic Field Therapies in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome

Comparative Effectiveness of Conventional, High-Intensity Laser, and Magnetic Field Therapies in Carpal Tunnel Syndrome: A Retrospective Study

This retrospective study aims to compare the clinical effectiveness of conventional physical therapy, high-intensity laser therapy (HILT), and pulsed magnetic field therapy (PMFT) in individuals with carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). The study evaluates changes in pain, symptom severity, functional status, hand grip strength, and electrophysiological findings following treatment. Researchers will compare the outcomes of the three treatment approaches to determine whether HILT or PMFT provides additional clinical benefits beyond conventional therapy. The findings may help clinicians select the most appropriate conservative treatment strategy for patients with CTS.

Study Overview

• Status: Completed
• Conditions: Carpal Tunnel Syndrome (CTS)
• Intervention / Treatment: Other: Conventional Physical Therapy; Other: High-Intensity Laser Therapy (HILT); Other: Pulsed Magnetic Field Therapy (PMFT)

Detailed Description

Carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) is the most common peripheral entrapment neuropathy and is characterized by pain, numbness, tingling, weakness, and functional limitations resulting from compression of the median nerve at the wrist. Conservative treatment is recommended for patients with mild-to-moderate CTS and commonly includes physical therapy modalities. Although conventional physiotherapy remains a standard treatment approach, newer modalities such as high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) and pulsed magnetic field therapy (PMFT) have gained increasing attention because of their potential analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and tissue-healing effects.

This retrospective observational study evaluates and compares the clinical outcomes of patients with CTS who received one of three conservative treatment approaches: conventional physical therapy alone, conventional physical therapy combined with HILT, or conventional physical therapy combined with PMFT. Clinical records will be reviewed to assess treatment-related changes in pain intensity, symptom severity, functional status, hand grip strength, and electrophysiological parameters before and after treatment.

The primary objective of the study is to compare the effectiveness of these treatment approaches in improving clinical outcomes in patients with CTS. The findings are expected to provide evidence regarding the relative effectiveness of HILT and PMFT as adjunctive treatment options to conventional physical therapy and to support clinical decision-making in the conservative management of carpal tunnel syndrome.

• Study Type: Observational
• Enrollment (Actual): 48

Contacts and Locations

Study Locations

• Turkey (Türkiye)
  • Karatay
    • Konya, Karatay, Turkey (Türkiye), 42030
      • Kto Karatay University

Participation Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: Adult; Older Adult
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

• Sampling Method: Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

The study population included adult patients with mild-to-moderate carpal tunnel syndrome who completed conservative treatment and had complete pre- and post-treatment clinical assessment records. Participants were classified according to the treatment received: conventional physical therapy, conventional physical therapy plus HILT, or conventional physical therapy plus PMFT.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

• Diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS)
• Mild-to-moderate CTS not requiring surgical intervention
• Positive Tinel's sign
• Received treatment at the participating center(s) within the past five years
• Complete pre-treatment and post-treatment clinical assessment records
• Completion of the prescribed treatment protocol

Exclusion Criteria:

• Previous carpal tunnel surgery or indication for surgical intervention Incomplete medical records
• Failure to complete the treatment protocol
• Presence of concomitant upper extremity disorders that could affect study outcomes
• Presence of neurological, orthopedic, or systemic conditions that could influence the clinical assessments

Study Plan

How is the study designed?

Number of groups / cohorts

3

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort	Intervention / Treatment
High-Intensity Laser Therapy (HILT) Group; Participants received high-intensity laser therapy in addition to the conventional physical therapy program.	Other: Conventional Physical Therapy; A standardized conservative treatment program including therapeutic ultrasound, TENS, nerve and tendon gliding exercises, and neutral wrist splinting.; Other: High-Intensity Laser Therapy (HILT); High-intensity laser therapy was applied according to the standard treatment protocol as an adjunct to conventional physical therapy.
Pulsed Magnetic Field Therapy (PMFT) Group; Participants received pulsed magnetic field therapy in addition to the conventional physical therapy program.	Other: Conventional Physical Therapy; A standardized conservative treatment program including therapeutic ultrasound, TENS, nerve and tendon gliding exercises, and neutral wrist splinting.; Other: Pulsed Magnetic Field Therapy (PMFT); Pulsed magnetic field therapy was applied according to the standard treatment protocol as an adjunct to conventional physical therapy.
Conventional Physical Therapy Group; Participants received a conventional physical therapy program consisting of therapeutic ultrasound, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), nerve and tendon gliding exercises, and the use of a neutral wrist splint.	Other: Conventional Physical Therapy; A standardized conservative treatment program including therapeutic ultrasound, TENS, nerve and tendon gliding exercises, and neutral wrist splinting.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Pain Intensity	Pain intensity was assessed using a 10-cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS), with higher scores indicating greater pain severity.	Baseline and immediately after completion of treatment (4 weeks)

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure	Measure Description	Time Frame
Hand Grip Strength	Hand grip strength was measured using a hand dynamometer according to standardized testing procedures. Higher values indicate greater grip strength.	Baseline and immediately after completion of treatment (4 weeks)
Symptom Severity and Functional Status	Symptom severity and functional status were evaluated using the Symptom Severity Scale of the Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. Higher scores indicate more severe symptoms.	Baseline and immediately after completion of treatment (4 weeks)

Collaborators and Investigators

• Sponsor: KTO Karatay University

Study record dates

Study Major Dates

• Study Start (Actual): January 20, 2020
• Primary Completion (Actual): October 20, 2024
• Study Completion (Actual): October 20, 2025

Study Registration Dates

• First Submitted: July 13, 2026
• First Submitted That Met QC Criteria: July 13, 2026
• First Posted (Actual): July 16, 2026

Study Record Updates

• Last Update Posted (Actual): July 16, 2026
• Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria: July 13, 2026
• Last Verified: January 1, 2020

More Information

Terms related to this study

• Keywords: Pain; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome; High-Intensity Laser Therapy; Pulsed Magnetic Field Therapy
• Additional Relevant MeSH Terms: Neurologic Manifestations; Nervous System Diseases; Wounds and Injuries; Neuromuscular Diseases; Peripheral Nervous System Diseases; Median Neuropathy; Mononeuropathies; Nerve Compression Syndromes; Cumulative Trauma Disorders; Sprains and Strains; Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms; Signs and Symptoms; Pain; Carpal Tunnel Syndrome
• Other Study ID Numbers: 2026/022

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

• Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?: NO
• IPD Plan Description: Individual participant data will not be shared because the study is based on retrospective medical records, and data sharing is restricted to protect participant confidentiality and comply with institutional and ethical requirements.

Drug and device information, study documents

• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product: No
• Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product: No