外部振动和冷装置对针肌电图患者疼痛感知的评价。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Muscle & Nerve Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-17 DOI:10.1002/mus.28375
Andriana Tompary, Nathaniel Wooten, Tengfei Li, Rebecca Traub
{"title":"外部振动和冷装置对针肌电图患者疼痛感知的评价。","authors":"Andriana Tompary, Nathaniel Wooten, Tengfei Li, Rebecca Traub","doi":"10.1002/mus.28375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction/aims: </strong>Previously tested interventions to reduce pain with needle electromyography (EMG) reported limited benefit. A topical cold and vibrating device has reported benefit in interventional procedures. We aimed to evaluate the effect of this device with EMG.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a two-part, prospective controlled study of a cold and vibrating device. In part one, 50 patients undergoing EMG testing on the upper extremity were randomized to EMG with or without the device and reported pain scores for each muscle. In the second part, 25 patients having EMG of both upper extremities reported pain scores, one side with the device and the other without.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In part one, there was no significant difference in average pain scores for patients with use of the device as compared to those without (average pain score 4.1 versus 3.7, p = 0.61). In the second part, there was no significant difference in pain scores in muscles tested with the device as compared those without (average pain score 4.3 versus 4.6, p = 0.47). In both parts, a wide range of pain scores were reported (0-10). In comparing device-to-control pain scores for each patient, 27% had a lower score, 15% had a higher score, and 58% had equal scores. There were no adverse events.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This study did not show pain reducing benefits from a cold and vibrating device that have been described in other interventional procedures. This may relate to different study populations, wide range of pain scores and study sample size.</p>","PeriodicalId":18968,"journal":{"name":"Muscle & Nerve","volume":" ","pages":"1072-1075"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of an External Vibrating and Cold Device on Patient Pain Perception During Needle Electromyography.\",\"authors\":\"Andriana Tompary, Nathaniel Wooten, Tengfei Li, Rebecca Traub\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/mus.28375\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction/aims: </strong>Previously tested interventions to reduce pain with needle electromyography (EMG) reported limited benefit. A topical cold and vibrating device has reported benefit in interventional procedures. We aimed to evaluate the effect of this device with EMG.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This was a two-part, prospective controlled study of a cold and vibrating device. In part one, 50 patients undergoing EMG testing on the upper extremity were randomized to EMG with or without the device and reported pain scores for each muscle. In the second part, 25 patients having EMG of both upper extremities reported pain scores, one side with the device and the other without.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In part one, there was no significant difference in average pain scores for patients with use of the device as compared to those without (average pain score 4.1 versus 3.7, p = 0.61). In the second part, there was no significant difference in pain scores in muscles tested with the device as compared those without (average pain score 4.3 versus 4.6, p = 0.47). In both parts, a wide range of pain scores were reported (0-10). In comparing device-to-control pain scores for each patient, 27% had a lower score, 15% had a higher score, and 58% had equal scores. There were no adverse events.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>This study did not show pain reducing benefits from a cold and vibrating device that have been described in other interventional procedures. This may relate to different study populations, wide range of pain scores and study sample size.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18968,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Muscle & Nerve\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1072-1075\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Muscle & Nerve\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.28375\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/17 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Muscle & Nerve","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/mus.28375","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/17 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

简介/目的:先前测试过的通过针肌电图(EMG)减少疼痛的干预措施的疗效有限。据报道,一种局部冷振动装置在介入手术中有益。我们的目的是用肌电图来评估该装置的效果。方法:这是一个两部分,前瞻性对照研究的冷和振动装置。在第一部分中,50名接受上肢肌电图测试的患者被随机分为有或没有该装置的肌电图组,并报告每个肌肉的疼痛评分。在第二部分中,有25例患者的上肢肌电图报告了疼痛评分,其中一侧有设备,另一侧没有。结果:在第一部分中,使用该装置的患者的平均疼痛评分与未使用该装置的患者相比无显著差异(平均疼痛评分4.1对3.7,p = 0.61)。在第二部分中,使用该装置的肌肉疼痛评分与未使用该装置的肌肉疼痛评分无显著差异(平均疼痛评分4.3比4.6,p = 0.47)。在这两个部分,报告了广泛的疼痛评分(0-10)。在比较每位患者的器械-对照疼痛评分时,27%的患者得分较低,15%的患者得分较高,58%的患者得分相同。没有不良事件发生。讨论:本研究并未显示在其他介入手术中使用冷震动装置减轻疼痛的益处。这可能与不同的研究人群、广泛的疼痛评分和研究样本量有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of an External Vibrating and Cold Device on Patient Pain Perception During Needle Electromyography.

Introduction/aims: Previously tested interventions to reduce pain with needle electromyography (EMG) reported limited benefit. A topical cold and vibrating device has reported benefit in interventional procedures. We aimed to evaluate the effect of this device with EMG.

Methods: This was a two-part, prospective controlled study of a cold and vibrating device. In part one, 50 patients undergoing EMG testing on the upper extremity were randomized to EMG with or without the device and reported pain scores for each muscle. In the second part, 25 patients having EMG of both upper extremities reported pain scores, one side with the device and the other without.

Results: In part one, there was no significant difference in average pain scores for patients with use of the device as compared to those without (average pain score 4.1 versus 3.7, p = 0.61). In the second part, there was no significant difference in pain scores in muscles tested with the device as compared those without (average pain score 4.3 versus 4.6, p = 0.47). In both parts, a wide range of pain scores were reported (0-10). In comparing device-to-control pain scores for each patient, 27% had a lower score, 15% had a higher score, and 58% had equal scores. There were no adverse events.

Discussion: This study did not show pain reducing benefits from a cold and vibrating device that have been described in other interventional procedures. This may relate to different study populations, wide range of pain scores and study sample size.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Muscle & Nerve
Muscle & Nerve 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
287
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Muscle & Nerve is an international and interdisciplinary publication of original contributions, in both health and disease, concerning studies of the muscle, the neuromuscular junction, the peripheral motor, sensory and autonomic neurons, and the central nervous system where the behavior of the peripheral nervous system is clarified. Appearing monthly, Muscle & Nerve publishes clinical studies and clinically relevant research reports in the fields of anatomy, biochemistry, cell biology, electrophysiology and electrodiagnosis, epidemiology, genetics, immunology, pathology, pharmacology, physiology, toxicology, and virology. The Journal welcomes articles and reports on basic clinical electrophysiology and electrodiagnosis. We expedite some papers dealing with timely topics to keep up with the fast-moving pace of science, based on the referees'' recommendation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信