The effect of ice bag application on musculoskeletal pain during application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Context: Ice bag application is a modality commonly used for pain relief in the athletic training setting, although there is limited evidence to support its use. This study evaluates the effectiveness of an ice bag application on musculoskeletal pain during the application. Objective: The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of ice application on pain during treatment for musculoskeletal injury. Design: Case series design with repeated measures comparisons. Participants: Twenty injured participants (19.9 ± 1.3 years), 14 males and 6 females, participated in this study. Participants were receiving ice bag applications as part of their treatment provided by an athletic trainer. Methods: Prior to the ice bag application, participants rated their pain on the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) and the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). Then, a bag filled with crushed ice was applied to the injured site for 20 minutes. Participants were asked to rate their pain at minutes one, five, and 20 while the ice was applied and then immediately after the ice was removed. Main Outcome Measures: Pain was reported using the NRS and MPQ. A repeated measures MANOVA and repeated measures ANOVA were used to determine significant effects (P < .05). Paired t-tests with a Bonferonni adjustment (alpha = 0.05/4) were used for the post-hoc analysis. Results: There was a significant time effect (F(20,300)=5.63, p=0.001). The separate repeated measures ANOVA indicated that time had a significant effect for NRSTotal (F(2.03)=51.5, p=0.001), MPQTotal (F(1.98)= 21.4, p=0.001), MPQSensory (F(2.15)=27.1, p=0.001), MPQAffective (F(2.13)=4.28, p=0.019), MPQEvaluative (F(2.27), 6.55, p=0.002) indicating that pain significantly decreased over time. The miscellaneous section of the MPQ had a significant time effect which reflected an increase in pain (F(2.71)=7.61, p=0.001). Conclusion: Pain was significantly reduced by the ice bag application, beginning five minutes after the treatment began and lasted even after the ice bag was removed. Therefore, clinicians should continue the use of ice application for immediate relief of pain resulting from musculoskeletal injury.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".