| Literature DB >> 30788281 |
Parivash Abbasi1, Mohammad Mojalli2, Mojtaba Kianmehr3, Somayeh Zamani4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Constipation is one of the most common digestive problems in patients undergoing hemodialysis. It has a negative effect on quality of life in these patients. As routine treatments are not effective in this regard, complementary therapies may help to overcome this condition. This study aimed to investigate the effect of acupressure on constipation in patients undergoing hemodialysis.Entities:
Keywords: Acupressure; Constipation; Hemodialysis
Year: 2019 PMID: 30788281 PMCID: PMC6369316
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Avicenna J Phytomed ISSN: 2228-7930
Figure 2Acupressure point applied to improve constipation (Stein, 2005)
Comparing demographic characteristics between the groups
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Acupressure | 35 | 60.3±12.5 | t=1.22 |
| Control | 35 | 64.4±10.6 | ||
|
| Acupressure | 35 | 15 (42.86)/20 (57.14) | X2=0.27 |
| Control | 35 | 19 (54.28)/16 (45.72) | ||
|
| Acupressure | 35 | 31 (88.57)/4 (11.43) | Fisher’s exact test: |
| Control | 35 | 33 (94.28)/2 (5.72) | ||
|
| Acupressure | 35 | 17 (48.57)/18 (51.43) | X2=1.09 |
| Control | 35 | 21 (60)/14 (40) |
F, female; M, male; Ma, married; S, single; N, no; Y, yes; n, number;
Comparing the mean number of defecation per week in 4 weeks after the beginning of intervention
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weak 1 | Acupressure | 35 | 2.73±1.11 | z=1.36 |
| Control | 35 | 2.36±0.81 | ||
| Weak 2 | Acupressure | 35 | 3.16±1.28 | z= 2.48 |
| Control | 35 | 2.46±1.16 | ||
| Weak 3 | Acupressure | 35 | 3.73±1.31 | z=3.47 |
| Control | 35 | 2.46±1.25 | ||
| Weak 4 | Acupressure | 35 | 4.03±1.80 | z=2.68 |
| Control | 35 | 2.76±1.54 |
Comparing the mean number of defecation before and after the intervention
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Acupressure | 35 | 2.33±0.95 | Z=0.20 |
| Control | 35 | 2.40±1.03 | ||
|
| Acupressure | 35 | 13.73±3.63 | Z=3.55 |
| Control | 35 | 10.06±3.77 |
Comparing the mean frequency of defecation between the two groups after adjusting for physical activity by covariance analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 144.33 | 10.65 | 0.002 |
|
| 25.63 | 1.89 | 0.17 |
RMSE, Root Mean Squared Error;