OBJECTIVE: To assess whether local active warming can lessen acute pelvic pain of gynaecological origin compared with traditional methods in a prehospital setting. DESIGN: Prospective, randomised, single-blinded study. Setting. Prehospital emergency system. Population. Women calling emergency ambulance for pelvic pain. METHODS: Women were randomised in two groups: resistive heating (group 1) or passive warming (group 2), each treatment was initiated at the emergency site. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain on visual analogue scale (VAS), anxiety and nausea, given as mean (SD). RESULTS: Prior to the interventions, all women were vasoconstricted and had comparable pain scores. Then, group 1 showed a significant (P < 0.01) reduction in pain (VAS: 72.2 [10.5] mm to 32.4 [18.0] mm), anxiety (VAS: 59.0 [10.9] mm to 37.5 [24.1] mm), nausea (VAS: 42.7 [6.2] mm to 21.6 [5.0] mm) and heart rate (101 [12] beats per minute [bpm] to 59 [8] bpm), as well as in the number of vasoconstricted women (from 19/19 (constricted/dilated) to 2/19 (constricted/dilated)), whereas scores in group 2 remained unchanged. There were no significant changes in blood pressure in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Local warming is an effective emergency care measure for acute pelvic pain.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess whether local active warming can lessen acute pelvic pain of gynaecological origin compared with traditional methods in a prehospital setting. DESIGN: Prospective, randomised, single-blinded study. Setting. Prehospital emergency system. Population. Women calling emergency ambulance for pelvic pain. METHODS:Women were randomised in two groups: resistive heating (group 1) or passive warming (group 2), each treatment was initiated at the emergency site. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Pain on visual analogue scale (VAS), anxiety and nausea, given as mean (SD). RESULTS: Prior to the interventions, all women were vasoconstricted and had comparable pain scores. Then, group 1 showed a significant (P < 0.01) reduction in pain (VAS: 72.2 [10.5] mm to 32.4 [18.0] mm), anxiety (VAS: 59.0 [10.9] mm to 37.5 [24.1] mm), nausea (VAS: 42.7 [6.2] mm to 21.6 [5.0] mm) and heart rate (101 [12] beats per minute [bpm] to 59 [8] bpm), as well as in the number of vasoconstricted women (from 19/19 (constricted/dilated) to 2/19 (constricted/dilated)), whereas scores in group 2 remained unchanged. There were no significant changes in blood pressure in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Local warming is an effective emergency care measure for acute pelvic pain.