OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of adjunctive postoperative massage and vibration therapy on short-term postsurgical pain, negative affect, and physiologic stress reactivity. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled trial. The treatment groups were: (1) usual postoperative care (UC); (2) UC plus massage therapy; or (3) UC plus vibration therapy. SETTING: The University of Virginia Hospital Surgical Units, Gynecology-Oncology Clinic, and General Clinical Research Center. SUBJECTS:One hundred and five (N = 105) women who underwent an abdominal laparotomy for removal of suspected cancerous lesions. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received UC with analgesic medication. Additionally, the massage group received standardized 45-minute sessions of gentle Swedish massage on the 3 consecutive evenings after surgery and the vibration group received 20-minute sessions of inaudible vibration therapy (physiotones) on the 3 consecutive evenings after surgery, as well as additional sessions as desired. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensory pain, affective pain, anxiety, distress, analgesic use, systolic blood pressure, 24-hour urine free cortisol, number of postoperative complications, and days of hospitalization. RESULTS: On the day of surgery, massage was more effective than UC for affective (p = 0.0244) and sensory pain (p = 0.0428), and better than vibration for affective pain (p = 0.0015). On postoperative day 2, massage was more effective than UC for distress (p = 0.0085), and better than vibration for sensory pain (p = 0.0085). Vibration was also more effective than UC for sensory pain (p = 0.0090) and distress (p = .0090). However, after controlling for multiple comparisons and multiple outcomes, no significant differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: Gentle Swedish massage applied postoperatively may have minor effects on short-term sensory pain, affective pain, and distress among women undergoing an abdominal laparotomy for removal of suspected malignant tissues.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of adjunctive postoperative massage and vibration therapy on short-term postsurgical pain, negative affect, and physiologic stress reactivity. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized controlled trial. The treatment groups were: (1) usual postoperative care (UC); (2) UC plus massage therapy; or (3) UC plus vibration therapy. SETTING: The University of Virginia Hospital Surgical Units, Gynecology-Oncology Clinic, and General Clinical Research Center. SUBJECTS: One hundred and five (N = 105) women who underwent an abdominal laparotomy for removal of suspected cancerous lesions. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received UC with analgesic medication. Additionally, the massage group received standardized 45-minute sessions of gentle Swedish massage on the 3 consecutive evenings after surgery and the vibration group received 20-minute sessions of inaudible vibration therapy (physiotones) on the 3 consecutive evenings after surgery, as well as additional sessions as desired. OUTCOME MEASURES: Sensory pain, affective pain, anxiety, distress, analgesic use, systolic blood pressure, 24-hour urine free cortisol, number of postoperative complications, and days of hospitalization. RESULTS: On the day of surgery, massage was more effective than UC for affective (p = 0.0244) and sensory pain (p = 0.0428), and better than vibration for affective pain (p = 0.0015). On postoperative day 2, massage was more effective than UC for distress (p = 0.0085), and better than vibration for sensory pain (p = 0.0085). Vibration was also more effective than UC for sensory pain (p = 0.0090) and distress (p = .0090). However, after controlling for multiple comparisons and multiple outcomes, no significant differences were found. CONCLUSIONS: Gentle Swedish massage applied postoperatively may have minor effects on short-term sensory pain, affective pain, and distress among women undergoing an abdominal laparotomy for removal of suspected malignant tissues.
Authors: Ann Gill Taylor; Lisa E Goehler; Daniel I Galper; Kim E Innes; Cheryl Bourguignon Journal: Explore (NY) Date: 2010 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.775
Authors: Albert Moraska; Robin A Pollini; Karen Boulanger; Marissa Z Brooks; Lesley Teitlebaum Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2008-05-07 Impact factor: 2.629
Authors: Kavita D Chandwani; Julie L Ryan; Luke J Peppone; Michelle M Janelsins; Lisa K Sprod; Katie Devine; Lara Trevino; Jennifer Gewandter; Gary R Morrow; Karen M Mustian Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med Date: 2012-07-15 Impact factor: 2.629