OBJECTIVE: This 12-week pilot study examines the efficacy of applying low frequency sound wave stimulation (between 16-160 Hz) through both hands and feet on relieving pain and improving functional ability in patients with chronic back pain.
METHODS: Twenty-three participants with chronic shoulder (eleven participants) or low back pain (twelve participants) underwent a 12-week vibration therapy program of three sessions per week. A low frequency sound wave device comprising four piezoelectric vibration-type tactile tranducers enclosed in separate 5-cm diameter circular plates, which generate sinusoidal vibratory stimuli at a frequency of 16-160 Hz, was used in this study. Primary outcome measure was pain sensation measured using the Visual Analogue Scale (P-VAS). The secondary outcome measures were pain-related disability measured using the pain disability index (PDI) and quality of life measured using the SF-12.
RESULTS: At week 12, significant reductions in pain sensation and pain-related disability were observed, with mean reductions of 3.5 points in P-VAS and 13.5 points in the PDI scores. Sixty-five percent of the participants had a reduction of at least 3 points on the P-VAS score, while 52% participants showed a decrease of at least 10 points in the PDI score. Significant improvement was observed in the SF-12 physical composite score but not the mental composite score.
CONCLUSIONS: The preliminary findings showed that passive application of low frequency sound wave stimulation therapy through both hands and feet was effective in alleviating pain and improving functional ability in patients with chronic back pain.
METHODS: The SAQ was translated from English to Turkish using the back-translation method. It contains 19 questions scored from 1 to either 5 or 6 in 5 domains (physical limitation, angina stability, angina frequency, disease perception, and treatment satisfaction). Cronbach's alpha coefficient was used to evaluate internal consistency. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was calculated to assess the construct validity. Convergent validity was examined using correlations between the SAQ and the MacNew Heart Disease Health-related Quality of Life Questionnaire (MacNew) and the Nottingham Health Profile. Divergent validity was evaluated using correlations between the SAQ and age, body mass index (BMI), gender, and the marital status of patients. A value of p<0.05 was considered statistically significant.
RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were enrolled in the study. The mean age of the study patients was 58.7 years (SD: 10.2). Cronbach's alpha scores of the SAQ, ranging in value from 0.715 to 0.910, demonstrated that this scale is reliable. All of the SAQ scales had a significant correlation with all of the MacNew scales, which indicated that the scale has convergent validity. Insignificant correlations with age, BMI, gender, and marital status illustrated the good divergent validity of the scale.
CONCLUSION: The Turkish version of the SAQ is a valid and reliable instrument. It is a useful and practical tool to evaluate patients with angina and CHD.
SUBJECTS: Patients who were admitted to the University of Malaya Medical Centre due to cardiac events.
METHODS: Eight different machine learning models were evaluated. The models included 3 different sets of features: full features; significant features from multiple logistic regression; and features selected from recursive feature extraction technique. The performance of the prediction models with each set of features was compared.
RESULTS: The AdaBoost model with the top 20 features obtained the highest performance score of 92.4% (area under the curve; AUC) compared with other prediction models.
CONCLUSION: The findings showed the potential of using machine learning models to predict return to work after cardiac rehabilitation.
OBJECTIVE: This scoping review aimed to identify and describe existing studies on pretravel health services provided by CPs, and the barriers, and facilitators.
METHODS: The PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for pertinent studies from their inception to February 2023. A manual search was also conducted of prominent travel medicine journals, Google Scholar, and the reference lists of the included studies. Potential barriers and facilitators were mapped to the 14 domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).
RESULTS: There were twelve studies included in the review. Pretravel health advice was the most prevalent form of pretravel health services. Within ten domains of the TDF, various factors that either facilitate or impede the provision of pretravel health services by CPs were identified.
CONCLUSION: The provision of pretravel health services by CPs may be affected by a number of practitioner and organizational factors. The provision of pretravel health services can be facilitated by informational resources, training and education in travel medicine, and collaboration amongst healthcare providers.
METHODS: A pilot cluster randomized controlled trial (cRCT) with qualitative interviews was conducted. Each primary care doctor was considered a cluster and randomized to either the control (usual practice) or intervention (DeSSBack) group. Patient outcomes including Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and a 10-point pain rating scale were measured at baseline and 2-month postintervention. The doctors in the intervention group were interviewed to explore feasibility and acceptability of using DeSSBack.
RESULTS: Thirty-six patients with nonspecific LBP participated in this study (intervention n = 23; control n = 13). Fidelity was poor among patients but good among doctors. The RMDQ and anxiety score had medium effect sizes of 0.718 and 0.480, respectively. The effect sizes for pain score (0.070) and depression score were small (0.087). There was appreciable acceptability and satisfaction with use of DeSSBack, as it was helpful in facilitating thorough and standardized management, providing appropriate treatment plans based on risk stratification, improving consultation time, empowering patient-centred care, and easy to use.
CONCLUSIONS: A future cRCT to evaluate the effectiveness of DeSSBack is feasible to be conducted in a primary care setting with minor modifications. DeSSBack was found useful by doctors and can be improved to enhance efficiency.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: The protocol of the cluster randomized controlled trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04959669).