Comparison of the Effects of Auditory and Visual Distraction on the Pain and Anxiety of Patients Receiving Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background & Aims: Today, the rate of kidney diseases and urinary tract stones is on the rise.A common treatment method for urinary tract stones is the use of extracorporeal lithotripsy using shock waves, which may cause pain in the patients when the waves penetrate the skin.Pain could affect hemodynamic parameters and cause restlessness and movement in the patients, thereby disrupting the lithotripsy process.To reduce the pain in these patients, pharmacological methods such as the injection of various narcotic and non-steroidal analgesics are used.In addition to these medications, non-pharmacological methods such as mental distraction could effectively decrease patients' pain during painful procedures.Previous studies have indicated that mental distraction methods could variable affect pain relief and reduce anxiety in patients during different painful techniques.The present study aimed to compare the effects of visual and auditory distraction the pain and anxiety of these patients. Materials & Methods:This three-group quasi-experimental study (auditory intervention, visual intervention, and control) was conducted with a pretest-posttest design at Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Iran in 2019.The sample population included the eligible candidates of extracorporeal lithotripsy referring to the lithotripsy unit of Ayatollah Kashani Hospital in Shahrekord in 2019 for outpatient treatment.The patients were selected via non-random sampling from the crusher candidates to achieve the sample size based on the inclusion criteria.The inclusion criteria were the initial diagnosis of kidney stones, age range of 20-50 years, auditory and visual health, and no history of using anti-anxiety medications and painkillers.The exclusion criteria were pain intolerance during the procedure, higher blood pressure than 140/90 mmHg, receiving drug therapy, drug addiction, history of mental and respiratory diseases, and previous experience of stone crushing.Data were collected before and after the intervention using the demographic information questionnaire, McGill short-form pain questionnaire, and Spielberger state-trait anxiety inventory.Data analysis was performed in SPSS version 16 using descriptive statistics (frequency, frequency percentage, mean, and standard deviation) and inferential statistics (paired t-test, t-test, Pearson's correlation-coefficient, and analysis of variance).Results: The Smirnov-Kolmogorov test showed that the study variables were normal (P>0.05).In total, 48% of the patients were male, and 42% were female.In terms of age, the research units were aged 23-51 years.The analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Chi-square indicated that demographic variables were not significantly different in the three study groups (P>0.05).The mean pain in the studied units was not considered significant in the study groups before the intervention (P=0.13), while this mean value was significant between the groups after the intervention (P<0.001).The lowest pain level during the intervention was observed in the visual intervention group, and Tukey's post-hoc test for the difference between the groups also showed that the mean anxiety in the visual intervention group was significantly lower compared to the auditory group (P<0.001).In addition, paired t-test demonstrated that the mean pain was significant in the intervention groups before and after the intervention, and the intervention was effective in the intervention groups (visual and auditory).However, no significant difference was observed in the mean pain before and after the intervention in the control group (P>0.05).No significant correlations were observed between the mean pain and anxiety with the demographic variables (P>0.05),mean anxiety (P=0.84), and pain of the patients (P=0.13)before the intervention in different group,
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".