Análise do efeito da auriculoacupuntura em pacientes com doença renal e dor musculoesquelética crônicas: ensaio clínico randomizado
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: chronic pain is common in patients with chronic kidney disease. Therefore, complementary therapies are part of the non-pharmacological measures in pain control, besides presenting lower risk, low cost and being less invasive. Among them, auriculoacupuncture stands out. Objective: to analyze the effect of auriculoacupuncture on chronic musculoskeletal pain in renal patients on hemodialysis. Method: randomized, controlled, blind ed trial conducted in two hemodialysis clinics. The study included two groups, totaling 94 patients, randomized into blocks, allocated in a ratio of 1:1, in which the intervention group received ear acupuncture (AA) and the control group, placebo acupuncture (SAA). The intervention group received 12 sessions of auriculoacupuncture during dialysis therapy for 12 consecutive weeks. The intervention consisted of the application of adhesive spheres in the shenmen, tranquilizer, thalamus, sympathetic, scratch point, kidney, spleen, liver and lumbar vertebrae. The control group received the same follow-up, but with the spheres, at the following points: tonsil, esophagus, genitals, scaly and helix 4. The size and model of the spheres were identical. The data analysis instruments were: Visual Analog Pain Scale (VAS) and Mc Gill's questionnaire for pain; Rolland Morris Scale for disability and Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) for sleep. In the analysis, the following tests were used: t Pareado, Wilcoxon, ANOVA and Cohen's D. Results: the variation between the median pain score in the initial and final moments was Δ=+0.4 (p=0.931) in the SAA and Δ=-5.89 (p<0.001) in the AA (VAS); Δ=-8.78 (p<0.001) in SAA and Δ=- 28.40 (p<0.001) in AA (McGill). Regarding disability, the variation was Δ=-3.02 (p=0.008) in SAA and Δ=-6.38 (p<0.001) in AA; and sleep Δ=-0.23 (p=0.102) in SAA and Δ=-6.80 (p<0.001) in AA. After the 12 sessions, the auriculoacupuncture reduced pain when compared to the SAA group measured by both the EVA Scale (63% F=38.09, p<0.001); mcgill (49% F=21.65, p<0.001). It also reduced disability (33% F=11.02, p<0.001) and improved sleep quality (109.1% F=109.1, p<0.001). A high magnitude of effect was found at the end of the 12 pain sessions measured by the EVA Scale (D=-1.93) and McGill (D=-1.34), as well as in the PSQI (D=-1.94). Regarding disability, a small magnitude of effect was observed (D=- 0.19). Conclusion: the auriculoacupuncture intervention showed a positive effect on reducing pain and disability and improving sleep quality of patients with renal disease and chronic musculoskeletal pain. REBEC: RBR:3cpwwt
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".