The effect of massage on cramp frequency, cramp severity, and sleep quality of hemodialysis patients: A randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Leg muscle cramps and compromised sleep patterns are prevalent issues experienced by individuals undergoing hemodialysis treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of massage therapy on hemodialysis patients experiencing cramping, specifically focusing on the frequency and severity of cramps, as well as the quality of sleep. METHODS: This research involved 36 hemodialysis patients. The intervention group received intradialytic massage targeting the lower extremities, administered three times a week for a total of six sessions over a 2-week period. Data collection utilized a Patient Information Form, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, the Visual Analog Scale, and a Patient Follow-Up Form. FINDINGS: The study revealed a significant reduction in both the frequency and severity of cramps experienced by patients in the intervention group during hemodialysis sessions and at home, from the end of one session to the beginning of the next, compared to the control group (p < 0.05). This effect was observed over the course of six dialysis sessions. Additionally, there was a notable decrease in the mean total score of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) among participants in the intervention group, declining from 9.00 ± 3.79 prior to massage therapy to 5.94 ± 2.84 post-massage (p < 0.001). Conversely, no significant change was observed in the control group, highlighting a notable disparity between the intervention and control groups in terms of sleep quality improvement. DISCUSSION: The investigation revealed that employing intradialytic massage on the lower extremities led to a reduction in both the frequency and severity of cramps, while also eliciting a positive impact on the sleep quality of patients undergoing hemodialysis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".