Effect of acupressure on pain intensity and physiological indices in patients undergoing extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: a randomized double-blind sham-controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread use of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL) as a treatment for kidney stones, it is essential to apply methods to control pain and improve patient comfort during this procedure. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effect of acupressure at the Qiu point on pain intensity and physiological indices in patients undergoing ESWL. METHODS: This randomized, sham-controlled clinical trial was conducted at the Shahid Beheshti Educational-medical Center in Hamadan City (western Iran) from May to August 2023. Seventy-four eligible patients were split into intervention (n = 37) and sham (n = 37) groups. Ten minutes before lithotripsy, the intervention group received acupressure at the Qiu point, while the sham group received touch at a neutral point. The primary outcomes were pain intensity measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and physiological indices such as blood pressure and heart rate at baseline, 1, 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 min after the intervention. The secondary outcomes included lithotripsy success and satisfaction with acupressure application. RESULTS: The analysis of 70 patients showed no significant differences in the demographic and clinical information of the patients across the two groups before the study (P > 0.05). Generalized estimating equations revealed that the interaction effects of time and group in pain and heart rate were significant at 30 and 40 min (P < 0.05). The results of this analysis for systolic blood pressure revealed a significant interaction at 30 min (P = 0.035). However, no significant interaction effects were found for diastolic blood pressure changes (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Acupressure at the Qiu point positively impacts pain in patients undergoing ESWL treatment and increases their satisfaction. However, these results for physiological indices require further studies. Thus, acupressure can be considered a simple, easy, and effective option for pain management in patients during this procedure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: [ https://en.irct.ir/trial/69117 ], identifier [IRCT20190524043687N4].

The Effect of Ostrich Oil as a Complementary Medicine on the Severity of Pruritus and Quality of Life in Hemodialysis Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Pruritus is one of the most common problems in a uremic syndrome that reduces the quality of life due to the constant unpleasant feeling. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of ostrich oil massage on the severity of pruritus and quality of life in hemodialysis patients. METHODS: In this study, 68 hemodialysis patients with pruritus were selected based on the available sampling method. The intervention group used 1 mL ostrich oil on the pruritus area for 10 min each night for 1 month. The control group received a placebo massage. Pruritus severity questionnaire-based itch severity scale and quality of life questionnaire were completed, respectively, at the end of each week and at the end of the period. Statistical analysis was done using SPSS software version 23 and applying on independent t test, paired t test, and analysis of covariance. RESULTS: During the first and second weeks after the treatment, there was no statistical difference between the mean scores of pruritus severity in both groups (p > 0.05); however, in the third and fourth weeks after the treatment, the mean severity level of pruritus in the ostrich oil group was lower than in the placebo group, and these differences were statistically significant between the two groups (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in quality of life between two groups of ostrich and placebo. CONCLUSION: The use of ostrich oil was effective in reducing pruritus in hemodialysis patients. This method can be proposed as a complementary method for relieving pruritus in hemodialysis patients.

Topical Almond Oil for Prevention of Pressure Injuries: A Single-Blinded Comparison Study.

PURPOSE: The aim of our study was to determine the effect of topical almond oil for prevention of pressure injuries. DESIGN: Single-blind randomized clinical trial. SAMPLE AND SETTING: Patients admitted to an intensive care unit in Besat Hospital, Hamadan, Iran, were invited to participate in the trial. Data were collected over an 8-month period. METHODS: A convenience sample of 108 patients, using a permuted block randomization method was assigned to 3 equal groups that received the intervention almond oil, placebo (liquid paraffin), or control (standard of care). Data included demographic information, Braden Scale score, and National Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel-European Pressure Ulcer Advisory Panel (NPUAP-EPUAP) pressure injury staging system classification score. The intervention and placebo groups received daily application of 6.5 cc of topical almond oil or paraffin to the sacrum, heels, and shoulders for 7 consecutive days. The skin was evaluated for pressure injuries by an expert nurse who was blinded to groups. Chi-square test, analysis of variance, and regression analyses were used to evaluate relationships within and between groups for study variables, incidence of pressure injuries, and duration of time of onset of pressure injuries. P values less than .05 were deemed statistically significant. RESULTS: The incidence of pressure injury in the almond oil group (n = 2; 5.6%) was lower than that in the placebo (n = 5; 13.9%, P = .189) or control groups (n = 9; 25.1%, P = .024). The incidence of pressure injuries in the control group was 6.8 and 2.12 (P = .227) times higher than that in the almond and placebo groups, respectively. The onset day of a pressure injury occurred 5.4 days after initiation of the protocol in the almond oil group compared to 4.22 days in the control group (P = .023) and 5 days in the placebo group (P = .196). CONCLUSION: The topical application of almond oil was associated with a lower incidence of pressure injuries and that developed later during the study compared to participants who received paraffin or standard of care only. Further study is recommended to advance this work in populations at risk for pressure injury.