MedGenMed : Medscape general medicine · 2000
Short-term outcomes of chronic back pain patients on an airbed vs innerspring mattresses.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеКонтролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Monsein M, Corbin T P, Culliton P D, Merz D, Schuck E A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare SF-36, pain Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and sleep VAS outcomes of an adjustable airbed with innerspring mattresses in a population of chronic back pain sufferers.
STUDY DESIGN: A-B-A trial, in 3 phases: the patients on their own bed for 1 night, on an adjustable airbed for 28 nights, and on their bed for 14 nights.
SETTING: Outpatient pain rehabilitation, physical therapy, and alternative medicine clinics.
PATIENTS: Three centers recruited 30 patients each with severe chronic back pain and without sleep apnea or other sleep disorders.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: SF-36 health status survey and VAS pain and sleep quality scales.
RESULTS: On VAS scales, 95% showed pain improvement, and 88% reported better sleep. The average improvements were a 32% pain decrease and a 73% increase in sleep quality, significant at P less than.001 (two-tail t test). Eighty percent improved on the SF-36 physical functioning dimension and 88% improved on the bodily pain dimension. The average score on each dimension improved (P less than.001). Eighty-five percent preferred the adjustable airbed.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: SF-36 and VAS outcomes measures showed a highly significant benefit for the airbed design in this short-term comparison. The airbed appears to be a useful sleep aid and an adjunct to medical and physical therapies for chronic back pain sufferers.
STUDY DESIGN: A-B-A trial, in 3 phases: the patients on their own bed for 1 night, on an adjustable airbed for 28 nights, and on their bed for 14 nights.
SETTING: Outpatient pain rehabilitation, physical therapy, and alternative medicine clinics.
PATIENTS: Three centers recruited 30 patients each with severe chronic back pain and without sleep apnea or other sleep disorders.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: SF-36 health status survey and VAS pain and sleep quality scales.
RESULTS: On VAS scales, 95% showed pain improvement, and 88% reported better sleep. The average improvements were a 32% pain decrease and a 73% increase in sleep quality, significant at P less than.001 (two-tail t test). Eighty percent improved on the SF-36 physical functioning dimension and 88% improved on the bodily pain dimension. The average score on each dimension improved (P less than.001). Eighty-five percent preferred the adjustable airbed.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: SF-36 and VAS outcomes measures showed a highly significant benefit for the airbed design in this short-term comparison. The airbed appears to be a useful sleep aid and an adjunct to medical and physical therapies for chronic back pain sufferers.