RESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: This study was done to determine the specificity and sensitivity of a commercial Pointer Plus (Point finder) in detecting a region of low skin resistance on the ear. DESIGN: This was a prospective blinded study. SETTING/LOCATION: The study was done at the Yale New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT. SUBJECTS: The subjects were men and women who work at Yale New Haven Hospital. INTERVENTIONS: There were no interventions. OUTCOME MEASURES: Correlations were made between self-reported musculoskeletal pain and the detection of low skin resistance on the ear. RESULTS: The positive predictive value for Pointer Plus detecting low skin resistance correlating to the neck region of French auricular map is 0.76 (76%). The positive predictive value for Pointer Plus to detect low skin resistance area correlating to the low back region of French auricular map is 0.25. The positive predictive value for Pointer Plus in detecting any low in skin resistance on the external auricles in patients who complained of more than two musculoskeletal pains is 0.29. CONCLUSIONS: The specificity and sensitivity of a commercial Pointer Plus (point finder) in detecting a region of low skin resistance on the ear being unreliable, depending on the correlating area based on a published auricular map. Additional assessments are needed to support the clinical practice.
Asunto(s)
Puntos de Acupuntura , Acupuntura Auricular/métodos , Oído Externo , Dolor de la Región Lumbar , Dolor de Cuello , Piel , Adulto , Comercio , Femenino , Humanos , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/terapia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Dolor de Cuello/terapia , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to examine whether 1 week of continuous auricular acupuncture could reduce low back and posterior pelvic pain associated with pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial was conducted on pregnant women who have lower back and posterior pelvic pain. These women were randomly assigned into an acupuncture group, a sham acupuncture group, or a waiting list control group. All participants were monitored for 2 weeks. RESULTS: Baseline and day 7 showed significant group differences in pain (F = 15; P < .0001) and in the disability rating index score (F = 7; P < .0001). The participants in the acupuncture group reported a significant reduction of pain and improvement of functional status as compared with those in the sham acupuncture and control groups. CONCLUSION: One week of continuous auricular acupuncture decreases the pain and disability experienced by women with pregnancy-related low back and posterior pelvic pain.
Asunto(s)
Acupuntura Auricular , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/terapia , Dolor Pélvico/terapia , Complicaciones del Embarazo/terapia , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Dimensión del Dolor , Proyectos Piloto , EmbarazoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To identify common treatments used for low-back pain (LBP) during pregnancy. DESIGN: A two-part anonymous survey. SETTING/LOCATION: New Haven, Connecticut. SUBJECTS: Pregnant women and providers of prenatal health care (nurse educators, nurse midwives, and obstetricians). RESULTS: We found that the majority of pregnant women who participated in our survey (61.7%) reported that they would accept complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) therapy as treatment for LBP during pregnancy. Similarly, 61% of providers of prenatal health care in our sample reported that they would consider using CAM as treatment for LBP during pregnancy. Massage (61.4%), acupuncture (44.6%), relaxation (42.6%), yoga (40.6%), and chiropractic (36.6%) were the most common CAM therapies recommended for LBP in pregnancy by the providers of prenatal health care in our sample. CONCLUSIONS: This two-part survey study found that both providers of prenatal health care and pregnant women in New Haven county are likely to use CAM treatments for pregnancy-induced LBP. Further investigation should focus on whether it is a nationwide phenomenon, as well as if various CAM therapies are an efficacious treatment for LBP during pregnancy.
Asunto(s)
Terapias Complementarias/estadística & datos numéricos , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/terapia , Bienestar Materno , Complicaciones del Embarazo/terapia , Terapia por Acupuntura/métodos , Adulto , Quiropráctica , Connecticut , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Dolor de la Región Lumbar/prevención & control , Masaje/métodos , Conducta Materna , Dimensión del Dolor/normas , Embarazo , Complicaciones del Embarazo/prevención & control , Relajación , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , YogaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the severity of the low back pain (LBP) during pregnancy, including prevalence, risk factors, impact on daily living, and health provider management. METHODS: An anonymous survey consisting of 36 questions was distributed to pregnant women participating in various prenatal care clinics and educational classes in New Haven County, Connecticut. A total of 950 surveys was returned from May 2002 through October 2003. At each site, a researcher was available each week to answer questions and gather surveys. RESULTS: Six hundred forty-five (68.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 65-72%) respondents reported experiencing LBP during their current pregnancy. The prevalence was not affected by gestational age (P =.56). Low back pain during the current pregnancy was predicted by age (younger women were more likely to develop it; P =.004), history of LBP without pregnancy (P =.002), during menstruation (P =.01), and during a previous pregnancy (P =.002). The majority of respondents reported that LBP during pregnancy caused sleep disturbances (58%; 95% CI 54-62%) and impaired daily living (57%; 95% CI 53-62%). Average pain was moderate in severity. Nearly 30% of respondents stopped performing at least one daily activity because of pain and reported that pain also impaired the performance of other routine tasks. Only 32% (95% CI 28-36%) of the respondents with LBP during pregnancy informed their prenatal care providers of this problem, and only 25% (95% CI 21-28%) of prenatal care providers recommended a treatment. CONCLUSION: Low back pain during pregnancy is a common problem that causes hardship in this population. Further studies are indicated in the areas of prevention and treatment.