Observational analysis demonstrates high sensitivity in detecting inflammatory processes in muscle-tendon injuries, suggesting AMT's role as a valuable diagnostic tool.
Technological advances have driven the evolution of infrared medical thermography (IRT) towards Advanced Medical Thermography (AMT), a non-invasive technique that integrates high-resolution cameras, greater thermal sensitivity, artificial intelligence, and specialized software designed specifically for humans. AMT allows for the accurate detection of superficial thermal alterations, identifying acute and chronic inflammatory processes and phases of muscle and tendon recovery. It has established itself as a complementary tool in the diagnosis, monitoring, and evaluation of inflammatory and musculoskeletal pathologies, especially in traumatology and rehabilitation. Its high sensitivity in detecting “hot spots” or thermal asymmetries provides great reliability and a high negative predictive value. Also noteworthy is its normality in healthy subjects and the absence of hyperthermia in concomitant degenerative or rheumatic pathologies. This paper reviews scientific studies that validate MTI in the field of traumatology and rehabilitation, showing it to be an extremely useful test for diagnosing pain secondary to musculotendinous injuries, from minor traumatic injuries of the spine to injuries of the shoulder, knee, or ankle. MIT is particularly useful in healthcare, as it allows diagnoses to be made after subjective pain where other tests are insufficient, highlighting its effectiveness in monitoring therapeutic progress, determining injury stages, and evaluating response to treatment. Furthermore, due to its non-invasive nature, repeatability, and high reproducibility, infrared thermography has proven to be a useful tool in the forensic and legal fields. Its application provides objective and reliable evidence in the assessment of bodily injury and subjective pain associated with injuries. In this context, it is establishing itself as an essential resource within the current approach to Legal and Forensic Medicine 5.0.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gil et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: