Treating individuals with amputations in therapeutic massage and bodywork practice: A qualitative study
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction Best practices for massage therapy and bodywork (TMB) treatment of individuals with amputations are not well established. Although anecdotal observations are available, they have limited applicability for informing effective massage therapy and bodywork approaches for individuals with amputations. This study is part of a multifaceted research program seeking to establish a foundation for education and investigation of TMB for amputation related conditions/symptomology. The purpose of this study was to understand how TMB practitioners approach and treat individuals with amputations and their perceptions of outcomes. The TMB practitioner perspective is important in informing the development of a TMB practice framework for people with amputation. Methods The methodology of this study was informed by the phenomenological approach to qualitative inquiry. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted between June and September 2015, recorded and transcribed. Analysis consisted of descriptive coding and themes emerged through an iterative process. Codes and themes were discussed and verified with the research team. Participants were invited to review developed themes to indicate the extent to which results accurately encompassed their experiences as TMB practitioners. Results Twenty-five community practicing, professional TMB practitioners from 16 states consented to participate and all completed one interview. Analysis identified four themes which indicated TMB practitioners: value touch and consider it a core aspect of treatment for individuals with amputations; operate under a core belief that individuals with amputations greatly benefit from TMB; and consider relief that stems from TMB to be multidimensional, including physical, mental, and emotional aspects; and, certain components of treatment approach are unique to amputation clients. Conclusions Findings support that individuals with amputation benefit from TMB, at least from the perspective of TMB practitioners. Findings of this exploratory research identify important questions regarding approaches to treatment and potential TMB effectiveness hypotheses for amputation populations. Next steps will consider TMB approach and effects from the perspective of those with amputation(s).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle