“James was a wonderful speaker. Engaging, knowledgeable and funny. Easy to listen to as well. Timing and spacing was good in my opinion. I am fascinated by potential benefits of photobiomodulation and so it was incredibly interesting to me.”
Registered Massage Therapist
Eddie has been going to XscapePain for about 6 months now for knee pain. He used to find walking half a block unbearable, but after using the NovoTHOR pod and Probe, he found that he was able to walk longer distances again. His pain had subsided with each session that he had. He recommends that you “believe the technology,” and that “even if you have chronic pain to try it, even before medication” because it worked for Eddie!
“Loved the one day training course. I have been wanting to take it for years but never could fly to any of those places it was taught at. With Covid restrictions it was done online and made it possible. Great!! Hope to have more such seminars.”
Medical Massage Therapist
Greeley CO, USA
About one month ago Rona started going to Discovery Health Healing Center when she heard they were getting the NovoTHOR pod. Rona was having thyroid issues but wasn’t really sure if it would help with that but decided to sign up for one of their free sessions. Rona also had neck and lower back pain from hip replacements some years ago.
On her drive home after the first session, she couldn’t believe it, she could turn her head to look over her shoulder when changing lanes which she had never been able to do. Rona signed up to their 3 month package and is already feeling so much better overall and has so much more energy to get on with daily tasks.
Rona’s advice is to give NovoTHOR a try as you are going to enjoy it and won’t regret it.
“Thank-you so much for a thorough and educational course. I found it very helpful in understanding the concepts and application of photobiomodulation for all fields of my work including musculoskeletal injuries, surgeries, cancer and lymphoedema.
I look forward to utilising my new skills in the clinic and continuing to learn more about PBMT through your courses and online tools. It was so interesting I only needed one coffee to keep me up for my all nighter from 1am – 9am Aussie time!!!”
Mornington VIC, Australia
Kevin was a husband, father, anaesthetist, chronic pain specialist, researcher, a fun, kind and generous man.
He was a vital founding member of the World Association for Laser Therapy (WALT) and a long-standing cheerleader for Photobiomodulation (PBM) as it is now known.
As well as being Consultant Anaesthetist at The Royal Oldham Hospital UK, Kevin was medical director at Dr Kershaw’s Hospice.
Kevin also had the thankless task of being the WALT treasurer for many years. His leadership and steady hand ensured the organisation survived several problematic periods.
All who met him will remember his warmth, humour and generosity of spirit.
He will be forever memorialised in my LLLT/PBM presentations as he researched and published two of my favourite PBM papers of all time (abstracts below and links to some PDFs).
I have converted some of his slides into this 4 minute movie and managed to lay some audio over it which was recorded about 20 years ago. Given this is one of the worst kinds of pain any one can suffer it is remarkable that such a simple tool can achieve such good results.
So thank you to Kevin for your contribution to the world, and our condolences to Jill, his wife and his children. Kevin was a special man, I know he will be missed.
THE EFFECT OF INFRARED LASER IRRADIATION (LLLI) ON THE DURATION AND SEVERITY OF POSTOPERATIVE PAIN: A DOUBLE BLIND TRIAL
Kevin C. Moore, Naru Hira, Ian J. Broome* and John A. Cruikshank
Departments of Anaesthesia and General Surgery, The Royal Oldham Hospital, Oldham, U.K *Department of Anaesthesia, The Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, U.K., General Practitioner, Pennymeadow Clinic, Ashton-under-Lyne, U.K.
This trial was designed to test the hypothesis that LLLT reduces the extent and duration of postoperative pain. Twenty consecutive patients for elective cholecystectomy were randomly allocated for either LLLT or as controls. The trial was double blind. Patients for LLLT received 6- 8-min treatment (GaAlAs: 830 nm: 60 mW CW: CM) to the wound area immediately following skin closure prior to emergence from GA. All patients were prescribed on demand postoperative analgesia (IM or oral according to pain severity). Recordings of pain scores (0-10) and analgesic requirements were noted by an independent assessor. There was a significant difference in the number of doses of narcotic analgesic (IM) required between the two groups. Controls n = 5.5: LLLT n = 2.5. No patient in the LLLT group required IM analgesia after 24 h. Similarly the requirement for oral analgesia was reduced in the LLLT group. Controls n = 9: LLLT n = 4. Control patients assessed their overall pain as moderate to severe compared with mild to moderate in the LLLT group. The results justify further evaluation on a larger trial population
A DOUBLE BLIND CROSSOVER TRIAL OF LOW LEVEL LASER THERAPY IN THE TREATMENT OF POSTHERPETIC NEURALGIA
Moore, K.C., Hira, N., Kumar, P.S., Jayakumar, C.S., and Ohshiro, T
Postherpetic. neuralgia can be an extremely painful condition which in many cases proves resistant lo all the accepted forms of treatment. It is frequently most severe in the elderly and may persist for years with no predictable course.
This trial was designed as a double blind assessment of the efficacy of low level laser therapy in the relief of the pain of post herpetic neuralgia with patients acting as their own controls. Admission to the trial was limited to patients with established post herpetic neuralgia of at least six months duration and who had shown little or no response to conventional methods of treatment. Measurements of pain intensity and distribution were noted over a period of eight treatments in two groups of patients each of which received four consecutive laser treatments. The results demonstrate a significant reduction in the pain intensity and distribution following a course of low level laser therapy.
Laser Therapy Pilot Edition 1:0 Pilot Issue 2 Pages 61-64
MONONGALIA COUNTY, W.Va (WDTV) – Cancer patients deal with many side effects when they go through treatment. The WVU Cancer Institute Department of Radiation Oncology found a way to prevent a side effect, known as mucositis, that is seen in head and neck cancer patients.
“It is an inflammation type of condition from head and neck radiation,” THOR photomedicine dental and oral mucositis specialist, Sara Jane Snyder said. “They get painful sores throughout their entire oral cavity, down their esophagus and all they down through their digestive track,” she said.
“Anybody who’s getting a high dose of chemoradiation treatment, it’s almost 100 percent guarantee that their going to get a high level of oral mucositis.”
Having mucositis can make everyday tasks difficult, like eating or brushing your teeth. This is why using what is called photobiomodulation helps treat this side effect.
“What we found is by shining light of a certain dose and of a certain wavelength, we can actually allow those sores to heal more quickly and reduce pain for patients,” Snyder said.
Recently, The Department of Radiation Oncology at the WVU Cancer institute began using this device.
“One of the reasons that we obtained it is because there are international guidelines for supportive care that recommend this kind of therapy for the prevention and treatment of oral mucositis caused by radiation,” The WVU Cancer Institute Radiation Oncology chair and M.D., Geraldine Jacobson said.
Having this new form of technology is something the institute is hopeful patients will have a better treatment experience.
“We’re really excited because I think it’s going to help our patients get through forms of treatment that are really important to them and they’re just going to feel better during treatment and afterwards,” Jacobson said.
U.S. CONGRESSIONAL BRIEFING. Ending Opioid Use – Washington DC
James Carroll presented evidence to Congress on the effectiveness of PBM for treating pain and where it can be used in place of opioids. Prof. Praveen Arany explained how and why it works, and Annette Quinn RN gave her first hand experience in treating over 854 patients with Oral Mucositis.
A hundred million adults in the United States are affected by chronic pain and $600 billion a year is spent on in health care, direct health care costs and lost productivity because of pain.
49,000 people from opioids in 2017, 19,000 of which were from prescribed opioids for pain relief.
We believe that Photobiomodulation therapy can help reduce the prescribing of opioid medication for pain relief and we wish to draw attention to the Congress and health care policymakers, NIH and CMS, about this potentially valuable tool.
This 15 minute video starts with an overview of Photobiomodulation and low level light therapy. Later in the presentation James introduces the Lumithera treatment for Dry Age related Macular Degeneration (AMD).
The paper “High-intensity versus low-level laser therapy in the treatment of patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial” Kheshie et al 2014 pitches the 3B BTL laser against the HIRO class IV “High intensity” laser. The results appear to show that the HIRO class IV “High intensity laser” was more effective than the “Low Level Laser”. HOWEVER, the HIRO class IV “High intensity” laser was delivered over a large area (not adequately defined but approx 100cm2 by my estimation) so the intensity was actually very low (about 13mW/cm2 which is less than most LED systems), and the 3B BTL “Low Level Laser” was actually very high (4 x 200mW small, high intensity beams) and were held stationary on the patella for over half an hour, YES, HALF AN HOUR IN ONE SPOT! This is insane.
This paper leads people to think that the class IV Hiro laser was more effective because it was higher intensity when in fact the beam distribution meant the average intensity distribution was low (13mW/cm2). The 3B laser was not so effective because it was held stationary such that it would cause an overdose. If the 3B laser treatment had been delivered in using same scanning technique as the class IV then they would likely have achieved the same result. (I am not a fan of scanning because you can never be sure how much energy you have delivered to an area, better to use a low intensity device and hold it still in my view).
This paper misdirects the reader towards favouring class IV lasers rather than 3b or LED by misinforming the reader.
The title of last months PMLS editorial was Low Level Laser Therapy (LLLT) and World Association for Laser Therapy (WALT) Dosage Recommendations. Written by the Scientific Secretary Prof. Jan Bjordal. He describes how far we have come and the importance of the WALT dosage recommendations. No abstract is available for editorials so I have prepared one for you below. Continue reading →
A paper titled ”The Effectiveness of Therapeutic Class IV (10 W) Laser Treatment for Epicondylitis” [ref] showed that 10 Watt Class IV laser (mixed 8W 970nm, 2W 810) was successful in reducing pain and improving function in an RCT with 15 patients, and that there was good statistical significance at 6 months following a course of 6 treatments.
The claim by class IV laser manufacturers is that class IV lasers are better (faster, deeper and more effective) than Class 3b and LED systems. Conversely the 3B laser and LED manufacturers argue that less power density is more effective because delivering energy too quickly can overdose tissues and class IV lasers might burn the skin.
Throughout this paper there are marketing messages claiming the advantages of shorter treatment times than low power LLLT systems and of course the title shouts “10 Watt Class IV laser” just in case the reader is in any doubt that more power is what you need.
Regular readers of this column know my obsession with irradiation parameters, particularly dose rate effects (W/cm2) and will not be surprised to learn that I deconstruced the irradiation parameters used in this trial . Surprise, surprise they were the same low irradiance levels typically used by 3B lasers and LED systems, if not less and the treatment time was longer too.
Yes, it was a 10 Watt laser and yes, 3,000 joules was delivered, however it had a large beam area and treatment was delivered over (45cm2) in a “painting fashion”. The fluence (dose) was 6.6 Joules/cm2 and the power density was a tiny 22mW/cm2, consequently treatment time was a hefty 5 mins.
The average irradiance was not disclosed in the paper and the reader is directed to think that more power is quicker.
P.S. research trials with 3B lasers are typically 30 seconds to 3 mins and our recommended treatment is 1 min with a large LED cluster to the lateral epicondyle and 30 seconds for any related trigger points.
The Treatment Protocol Library is available only to THOR Customers and/or people who have attended a THOR training course in the last 3 years. All treatments are based on our four step method which includes treatment of the injury, trigger points, lymphatics and nerve roots.
Take a look to see how it works and let us know what you think.