Pilot study: rapidly cycling hypobaric pressure improves pain after 5 days in adiposis dolorosa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adiposis dolorosa (AD) is a rare disorder of painful nodular subcutaneous fat accompanied by fatigue, difficulty with weight loss, inflammation, increased fluid in adipose tissue (lipedema and lymphedema), and hyperalgesia. Sequential compression relieves lymphedema pain; we therefore hypothesized that whole body cyclic pneumatic hypobaric compression may relieve pain in AD. To avoid exacerbating hyperalgesia, we utilized a touch-free method, which is delivered via a high-performance altitude simulator, the Cyclic Variations in Altitude Conditioning™ (CVAC™) process. As a pilot study, 10 participants with AD completed pain and quality of life questionnaires before and after 20-40 minutes of CVAC process daily for 5 days. Participants lost weight (195.5 ± 17.6-193.8 ± 17.3 lb; P = 0.03), and bioimpedance significantly decreased (510 ± 36-490 ± 38 ohm; P = 0.01). There was a significant decrease in scores on the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (P = 0.039), in average (P = 0.002), highest (P = 0.029), lowest (P = 0.04), and current pain severity (P = 0.02) on the Visual Analogue Scale, but there was no change in pain quality by the McGill Pain Questionnaire. There were no significant changes in total and physical SF-36 scores, but the mental score improved significantly (P = 0.049). There were no changes in the Pain Disability Index or Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. These data present a potential, new, noninvasive means of treating pain in AD by whole body pneumatic compression as part of the CVAC process. Although randomized, controlled trials are needed to confirm these data, the CVAC process could potentially help in treating AD pain and other chronic pain disorders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".