Effects of SP6 and ST36 Acupressure on Pain and Physiological Indexes in Addicted Men: A Single-Blind Randomized Clinical Trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Pain is the most crucial reason to seek treatment, and acupressure is one of the most common ways to relieve pain; therefore, this study was conducted with the aim to investigate the effectiveness of acupressure on the reduction of pain and stability of physiological indexes in addicted men. Methods: The present single-blind, randomized, clinical trial was performed on 90 participants who were hospitalized in an addiction treatment camp in Masjed-e-Soleyman, Iran. The participants were divided into acupressure group (n = 45) and control group (n = 45) through allocating permutation blocks method. The acupressure group received acupressure on SP6 and ST36 points for 3 consecutive sessions and each session for 10 minutes. The data collection tools used included a demographic information questionnaire, the Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire (SF-MPQ), and a physiological index registration form, tympanic thermometer, sphygmomanometer, pulse oximetry device, and digital watch. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to analyze the data. P ≤ 0.05 was considered statically significant. Findings: There was a statistically significant decrease in the sensory dimension of pain in the acupressure group compared to the control group in all 3 sessions (P ≤ 0.001; P ≤ 0.001; P = 0.001, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in the overall pain score (P ≥ 0.005), emotional pain dimension (P ≥ 0.005), and physiological indexes of pain (P ≥ 0.005) between the two groups after the intervention. Conclusion: Acupressure is a non-invasive and cost-effective method that reduces the sensory dimension of painý, and its application does not require special tools; ýthus, the use of such a safe and secure method for relieving pain is recommended.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".