| Literature DB >> 24949078 |
Brittany Schroeder1, Jennifer Doig1, Kalyani Premkumar1.
Abstract
Background. Massage therapy is a noninvasive treatment that many individuals with multiple sclerosis (MS) use to supplement their conventional treatment. Objective. We hypothesize that massage therapy will improve the leg function and overall quality of life (QoL) of MS patients. Design. A two-period (rest, massage) crossover design was used. Twenty-four individuals with MS ranging from 3.0 to 7.0 on the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) received Swedish massage treatments for four weeks. Exercise capacity and leg function as well as QoL were assessed using the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) and the Hamburg Quality of Life in Multiple Sclerosis (HAQUAMS) instrument, respectively. Assessments were measured before and after a massage period and a rest period where no massages were employed. Results. The results displayed no significant changes in 6MWT distances or HAQUAMS scores. However, the participants perceived improvement in overall health as expressed in written comments. Conclusions. Massage is a safe, noninvasive treatment that may assist MS patients in managing the stress of their symptoms. Future studies with larger sample size and cortisol measures are warranted.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 24949078 PMCID: PMC4034721 DOI: 10.1155/2014/640916
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Evid Based Complement Alternat Med ISSN: 1741-427X Impact factor: 2.629
Figure 1Two-period crossover study design. Group 1 received massages from weeks 1 to 4. Group 2 receives massages from weeks 5 to 8.
Participant characteristics.
| Participant characteristics ( | |
|---|---|
| Average age (years) | 50 (30 to 72) |
| Gender (m : f) | 9 : 17 |
| Height range | 1.56 meters to 1.95 meters |
| Average height | 1.67 meters |
| Weight range | 51 kg to 141 kg |
| Average weight | 83.8 kg |
| EDSS* score range | 3.5 to 6.5 |
| Average EDSS* score | 4.5 |
| Time since initial MS diagnosis | 10 months to 44 years |
| Previous use of massage prior to the study (yes : never) | 18 : 6 |
*Kurtzke expanded disability status scale.
Six-Minute Walk Test results. Lower severity group is individuals with an EDSS of 3.0–4.9, while higher severity group is individuals with an EDSS of 5.0–7.0.
| Group | Group 1 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assessment 1 (A1) | Assessment 2 (A2) | Assessment 3 (A3) | Effect size | Effect size | ||||
| M | (SD) | M | (SD) | M | (SD) | A1 − A2 | A2 − A3 | |
| Lower severity ( | 489.25 | (89.68) | 512.75 | (92.59) | 499.63 | (107.06) | −.26 | .13 |
| Higher severity ( | 323.00 | (131.92) | 362.00 | (148.55) | 352.40 | (144.16) | −.28 | .04 |
| Group 1 total ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| − |
|
|
| ||||||||
| Group | Group 2 | |||||||
| Assessment 1 | Assessment 2 | Assessment 3 | Effect size | Effect size | ||||
| M | (SD) | M | (SD) | M | (SD) | A1 − A2 | A2 − A3 | |
|
| ||||||||
| Lower severity ( | 522.25 | (42.25) | 528.50 | (40.81) | 526.50 | (52.91) | −.15 | .04 |
| Higher severity ( | 240.00 | (119.91) | 244.29 | (101.83) | 248.14 | (91.74) | −.03 |
|
| Group 2 total ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| − |
|
Hamburg Quality of Life in MS results. The average score of the five subscales was weighed evenly to calculate the HAQUAMS averages used in analysis. Lower scores reflect more positive ratings.
| Group | Group 1 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assessment 1 | Assessment 2 | Assessment 3 | Effect size | Effect size | ||||
| M | (SD) | M | (SD) | M | (SD) | A1 − A2 | A2 − A3 | |
| Lower severity ( | 73.25 | (17.20) | 72.88 | (16.37) | 71.75 | (13.49) | .02 | .08 |
| Higher severity ( | 91.20 | (22.04) | 82.80 | (22.95) | 86.40 | (24.87) | .37 | −.15 |
| Group 1 total ( |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| − |
|
| ||||||||
| Group | Group 2 | |||||||
| Assessment 1 | Assessment 2 | Assessment 3 | Effect size | Effect size | ||||
| M | (SD) | M | (SD) | M | (SD) | A1 − A2 | A2 − A3 | |
|
| ||||||||
| Lower severity ( | 72.25 | (30.08) | 74.25 | (33.25) | 71.50 | (21.89) | −.06 | .10 |
| Higher severity ( | 82.86 | (12.64) | 83.71 | (13.23) | 83.14 | (13.09) | −.07 | .04 |
| Group 2 total ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| − |
|
Personal health rating. Lower scores reflect more positive ratings.
| Group | Group 1 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Assessment 1 | Assessment 2 | Assessment 3 | Effect size | Effect size | ||||
| M | (SD) | M | (SD) | M | (SD) | A1 − A2 | A2 − A3 | |
| Lower severity ( | 2.88 | (.83) | 3.38 | (.74) | 3.38 | (1.06) | −.64 | 0 |
| Higher severity ( | 4.00 | (1.41) | 4.00 | (1.41) | 4.40 | (.89) | 0 | −.33 |
| Group 1 total ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| − | − |
|
| ||||||||
| Group | Group 2 | |||||||
| Assessment 1 | Assessment 2 | Assessment 3 | Effect size | Effect size | ||||
| M | (SD) | M | (SD) | M | (SD) | A1 − A2 | A2 − A3 | |
|
| ||||||||
| Lower severity ( | 3.50 | (1.00) | 4.00 | (.82) | 3.00 | (.82) | −.55 | 1.22 |
| Higher severity ( | 4.14 | (.90) | 4.29 | (.49) | 3.71 | (.76) | −.21 | .90 |
| Group 2 total ( |
|
|
|
|
|
| − |
|
*Statistically significant P < 0.05.