METHODS: A non-blinded, randomised controlled trial will be conducted. A total of sixty-six patients who fulfil the inclusion criteria will be recruited. The participants will be randomly allocated into intervention (traditional Malay massage) and control (relaxation position) groups. Blood and saliva samples will be collected before and immediately after intervention. All collected samples will be analysed. The primary outcomes are the changes in the level of substance P in both saliva and blood samples between both groups. The secondary outcomes include the levels of inflammatory mediators [i.e. TNF-α, IL-1β, IL-8, monocyte chemotactic protein-1, IL-6 and IL-10, and the soluble form of the intercellular adhesion molecule], the pain intensity as measured by a visual analogous scale and functional outcomes using the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire.
DISCUSSION: Massage is a type of physical therapy that has been proven to be potentially capable of reducing unpleasant pain sensations by a complex sensory response and chemical mediators such as substance P and various inflammatory mediators. Previous studies conducted using Thai, Swedish, or other forms of massage therapies, have showed inconsistent findings on substance P levels pre and post the interventions. Each massage genre varies in terms of massage and joint mobilization points, as well as the lumbar spinous process. Traditional Malay massage, known locally as "Urut Melayu", involves soft-tissue manipulation of the whole body applied using the hands and fingers. This massage technique combines both deep muscular tissue massage and spiritual rituals. This trial is expected to give rise to new knowledge underlying the mechanisms for pain and inflammation relief that are activated by traditional Malay massage.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials ACTRN12615000537550 .
OBJECTIVE: To compare the outcomes of minimal invasive surgery (MIS) and conventional open surgery for spinal metastasis patients.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There is lack of knowledge on whether MIS is comparable to conventional open surgery in treating spinal metastasis.
METHODS: Patients with spinal metastasis requiring surgery from January 2008 to December 2010 in two spine centers were recruited. The demographic, preoperative, operative, perioperative and postoperative data were collected and analyzed. Thirty MIS patients were matched with 30 open surgery patients using propensity score matching technique with a match tolerance of 0.02 based on the covariate age, tumor type, Tokuhashi score, and Tomita score.
RESULTS: Both groups had significant improvements in Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG), Karnofsky scores, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain and neurological status postoperatively. However, the difference comparing the MIS and open surgery group was not statistically significant. MIS group had significantly longer instrumented segments (5.5 ± 3.1) compared with open group (3.8 ± 1.7). Open group had significantly longer decompressed segment (1.8 ± 0.8) than MIS group (1.0 ± 1.0). Open group had significantly more blood loss (2062.1 ± 1148.0 mL) compared with MIS group (1156.0 ± 572.3 mL). More patients in the open group (76.7%) needed blood transfusions (with higher average units of blood transfused) compared with MIS group (40.0%). Fluoroscopy time was significantly longer in MIS group (116.1 ± 63.3 s) compared with open group (69.9 ± 42.6 s). Open group required longer hospitalization (21.1 ± 10.8 days) compared with MIS group (11.0 ± 5.0 days).
CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that MIS resulted in comparable outcome to open surgery for patients with spinal metastasis but has the advantage of less blood loss, blood transfusions, and shorter hospital stay.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.
METHODS: The search strategies were performed via EBSCO MEDLINE, EBSCO CINAHL, Science Direct, PubMed, and PEDro databases from 2006 to 2016. The keywords "patient education", "low back pain", "elderly", "older adults", "older persons" and "older people" were used during the literature search. Boolean operators were used to expand or limit the searching scope and manual exclusion was performed to choose articles eligible for this study.
RESULTS: A total of 2799 articles were retrieved but only five articles were related with patient education for older people with LBP. Findings suggest that patient education for older people may differ in terms of its contents such as health education, self-management, video education, and postural education. The high methodological quality of the studies revealed that patient education showed improvement in terms of pain, disability and quality of life among older people with LBP.
CONCLUSIONS: Patient education improved pain and had positive effects on disability and quality of life among older people with LBP. However, due to the limited number of RCTs more studies are needed to provide evidence for its effectiveness.
OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of adherence and outcome to outpatient multimodal rehabilitation in chronic low back pain (CLBP).
METHODS: A total of 273 CLBP patients participated in an exercise-based rehabilitation program. Patients who completed ⩾ 70% of the treatment course were classified as adherent. Patients showing a post-treatment reduction of ⩾ 30% in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) back pain intensity scores were assigned to the favorable outcome group.
RESULTS: Multivariate logistic regression revealed that higher age, higher ability to perform low-load activities, and higher degrees of kinesiophobia increased the odds to complete the rehabilitation program. By contrast, lower levels of education and back pain unrelated to poor posture increased the odds for non-adherence. Furthermore, a favorable outcome was predicted in case the cause for LBP was known, shorter symptom duration, no pain in the lower legs, no difficulties falling asleep, and short-term work absenteeism.
CONCLUSIONS: Assessment and consideration of patient pre-treatment characteristics is of great importance as they may enable therapists to identify patients with a good prognosis or at risk for non-responding to outpatient multimodal rehabilitation.
Patients and methods: This single-blind, prospective, randomized-controlled study included a total of 20 patients (8 males, 12 females; mean age: 53.5±13.8; range, 31 to 82 years) with chronic neuropathic pain between January 2014 and June 2014. The patients were randomized to BEST (n=10) or placebo (n=10) group. Pain was measured using the Visual Analog Scale, and serum cortisol levels were measured before and after treatment.
Results: There was no significant difference in the baseline demographics, diagnosis, and treatment modalities between the groups. Approximately 50% patients in the treatment group reported that the treatment was effective, compared to 30% in the placebo group. Pain score reduction after treatment in the BEST group was significant (p<0.05), while it was not significant in the placebo group (p=0.4). Cortisol levels significantly reduced only in the BEST group after treatment (p=0.013).
Conclusion: The BEST yields reduction in pain severity and cortisol levels. Based on these results, it seems to be effective in the treatment of chronic neuropathic pain after a single treatment and may be more effective for long-term management.
METHODOLOGY: The study was designed as a double-blind, randomized controlled trial involving 94 patients who underwent open thyroidectomy or parathyroidectomy in Hospital Pulau Pinang, Malaysia, from November 2015 to November 2016. The study compared the efficacy of pre-incision wound infiltration of diclofenac (n = 47) versus bupivacaine (n = 47) in post-operative pain relief. Wound infiltration is given prior to skin incision. Mean pain score at designated time interval within the 24-h post-operative period, time to first analgesia, total analgesic usage and total analgesic cost were assessed.
RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were recruited with no dropouts. Mean age was 49.3 (SD = 14.2) with majority being female (74.5%). Ethnic distribution recorded 42.6% Chinese, 38.3% Malay, followed by 19.1% Indian. Mean duration of surgery was 123.8 min (SD = 56.5), and mean length of hospital stay was 4.7 days (SD = 1.8). The characteristics of patient in both groups were generally comparable except that there were more cases of total thyroidectomy in the diclofenac group (n = 31) as compared to the bupivacaine group (n = 16). Mean pain score peaked at immediate post-operative period (post-operative 0.5 h) with a score of 3.5 out of 10 and the level decreased steadily over the next 20 h starting from 4 h post-operatively. Pre-incision wound infiltration using diclofenac had better pain control as compared to bupivacaine at all time interval assessed. In the resting state, the mean post-operative pain score difference was statistically significant at 2 h [2.1 (SD = 1.5) vs. 2.8 (SD = 1.8), p = 0.04]. During neck movement, the dynamic pain score difference was statistically significant at post-operative 1 h [2.7 (SD = 1.9) vs. 3.7 (SD = 2.1), p = 0.02]; 2 h [2.7 (SD = 1.6) vs. 3.7 (SD = 2.0), p = 0.01]; 4 h [2.2 (SD = 1.5) vs. 2.9 (SD = 1.7), p = 0.04], 6 h [1.9 (SD = 1.4) vs. 2.5 (SD = 1.6), p = 0.04] and 12 h [1.5 (SD = 1.5) vs. 2.2 (SD = 1.4), p = 0.03]. Mean dose of tramadol used as rescue analgesia in 24 h duration was lower in the diclofenac group as compared to bupivacaine group [13.8 mg (SD = 24.9) vs. 36.2 mg (SD = 45.1), p = 0.01]. The total cost of analgesia used was significantly cheaper in diclofenac group as compared to bupivacaine group [RM 3.47 (SD = 1.51) vs. RM 13.43 (SD = 1.68), p pain relief compared to bupivacaine for patient who had underwent open thyroidectomy or parathyroidectomy. Diclofenac is cheap and easily available in the limited resource setting. This approach offers a superior alternative for post-operative pain relief as compared to bupivacaine.
METHODS: A randomized trial was performed in a university hospital in Malaysia. Participants were nulliparas at term with unripe cervixes (Bishop Score ≤ 5) admitted for IoL who were randomized to digital or speculum-aided transcervical Foley catheter insertion in lithotomy position. Primary outcomes were insertion duration, pain score [11-point Visual Numerical Rating Scale (VNRS)], and failure. All primary outcomes were recorded after the first insertion.
RESULTS: Data from 86 participants were analysed. Insertion duration (with standard deviation) was 2.72 ± 1.85 vs. 2.25 ± 0.55 min p = 0.12, pain score (VNRS) median [interquartile range] 3.5 [2-5] vs. 3 [2-5] p = 0.72 and failure 2/42 (5%) vs. 0/44 (0%) p = 0.24 for digital vs speculum respectively. There was no significant difference found between the two groups for all three primary outcomes. Induction to delivery 30.7 ± 9.4 vs 29.6 ± 11.5 h p = 0.64, Cesarean section 25/60 (64%) vs 28/64 (60%) RR 0.9 95% CI p = 0.7 and maternal satisfaction VNRS score with the birth process 7 [IQR 6-8] vs 7 [7-8] p = 0.97 for digital vs. speculum arms respectively. Other labor, delivery and neonatal secondary outcomes were not significantly different.
CONCLUSION: Digital and speculum insertion in nulliparas with unripe cervixes had similar insertion performance. As digital insertion required less equipment and consumables, it could be the preferred insertion method for the equally adept and the insertion technique to train towards.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered with ISRCTN registration number 13804902 on 15 November 2017.
METHODS: The study was an interventional and crossover comparison. Twenty-one patients with TN were administered with LTG in comparison to CBZ. The clinical trials comprised two phases of 40 days each, with an intervening three-day washout period. The final titration in dose for LTG was 400 mg and 1,200 mg for CBZ. Efficacy of the medications involved was determined by visual analog scale (VAS) and verbal rating scale (VRS). Side effects were recorded through marking of the profiles of side effects encountered on administration of LTG and CBZ, together with baseline haematological, hepatic and renal investigations.
RESULTS: Both on VAS and VRS assessments, in terms of proportion of patients, CBZ benefitted 90.5% (19/21) of the patients with pain relief (p pain relief from LTG and 19 from CBZ, 77% (10/13) obtained a "complete" degree of pain relief from LTG, as compared with 21% (4/19) from CBZ. On VRS assessment, with LTG, 84% (11/13) of the patients accomplished "much better" degree of pain relief, as compared with 26% (5/19) with CBZ. On LTG, 67% (14/21) of patients endured general pharmacological side effects, as compared with 57% (12/21) of patients on CBZ (p > 0.05). Meanwhile, LTG inflicted 14% (3/21) of the patients with haematological, hepatic and renal derangements, as compared with 48% (10/21) on CBZ.
CONCLUSION: LTG is generally an effective and safe treatment for management of TN, compared to CBZ.
METHODS: Patients aged 18 years old or above and who were scheduled for gynecology surgery were selected. Three different models with a combination of latent factors were based on a priori hypotheses from previous studies. The root-mean-squared error of approximation, comparative fit index, Tucker-Lewis Index, Chi-squared test, and change in Chi-squared statistic given a change in degrees of freedom between models were used to assess the model fit to the present data.
RESULTS: A total of 302 patients completed the questionnaire. The five-factor model which was based on Gordon's study has an acceptable fit for the data and was superior when compared to the one-factor baseline model. Although the four-factor model, which originated from Botti's study, also demonstrates a good model fit, the "perception of care" construct was excluded in this model. The "perception of care" construct is conceptually important as patient-centered care has become the focus of quality improvement of pain service.
CONCLUSIONS: The APS-POQ-R is easy to administer and is useful for quality evaluation in postoperative pain management. The present study demonstrates that a five-factor structure of the APS-POQ-R is the best fitting model in our patient sample. The results of this study provide further evidence to support the use of APS-POQ-R as a measurement tool for pain management evaluation in acute postoperative patients with a multi-cultural background.
METHODS: This is an observational, cross-sectional analysis of 486 women who presented to a tertiary urogynecological center between May 2013 and August 2014. They underwent a standardized interview and an examination that involved 3-dimensional/4-dimensional TPUS. The SMIS and VAS were administered if they answered positively to a question on AI. The association between defects of the EAS and symptoms of AI was evaluated using bivariate tests, as well as adjusting for pertinent covariates using multiple linear regression modeling.
RESULTS: Of the included patients, 17.1% reported AI, and 15.2% had significant EAS defects (≥4 slices) on TPUS imaging. A significant sonographic defect was diagnosed in 23% of women with AI versus 14% of those without (P = 0.033). Women with symptoms of AI were more likely to have a significant defect on TPUS (odds ratio, 1.878; 95% confidence interval, 1.05-3.37). No significant findings were seen when analyzing SMIS, its components, and VAS against sonographic EAS defects.
CONCLUSIONS: The symptom of AI is associated with significant EAS defects detected on TPUS. However, this study failed to show an association between significant EAS defects and the SMIS and VAS.