Introduction
Massage therapies have been shown to minimize the theoretically observed signs of pain in a patient getting medical care. The current research aimed to investigate how massage therapies would impact patients’ view of pain particularly in the intensive care environment. Past research has generated the gains associated with massage therapy for a patient affected by specific sicknesses-for instance cardiac operation and/or conditions (Adams et al., 2010) – and cancer (Charmaz, 2003). Other researches have aimed at patient knowledge within certain medical care departments comprising among others transplantation, inpatient, and psychotherapy. By choosing study participants from all medical care departments, this project offers an exceptional understanding of how massage therapies may assist patients dealing with the pains and/or problems attached to hospitalization, providing firm evidence that massage is a successful add-on way of managing pain.
Despite the diverse features of the sample, similar outcomes regarding the reduction of pain were attained in almost all patients (Adams et al., 2010). The mixed-method data generated from the literature searches indicated that interventions like massage therapies only appear to be successful if the patients are handled with understanding and if relationships between the massage professionals and the patients had been established before massaging (Charmaz, 2003). These observations underpin the postulation that perceived or unperceived impacts of massaging rely on the intervention itself and also on the timing, the environment, and the resting posture of the patients; moreover, the mindset of the therapists plays a significant duty.
The view regarding pain in the literature exhibited dissimilar baseline levels, with the optimum baseline level being the one indicated by Moyer (2009). This research was carried out in Australia. Although all participants were suffering from bone diseases, the traditional element may have influenced the qualitative examination of pain.
The perception of Richards (1998) and Smith et al. (2002) that massaging can realize significant pain drop and consequently reduce the intake of painkillers was not proved. A patient requires adequate pain management measures; otherwise, states of relaxation before the commencing of the therapy intervention cannot be attained. If the authors could have considered a more neutral approach to massage therapy then such variations could be minimized. Of the studies reviewed only one research indicated a promotion of pain observation as an adverse result of massaging and that a patient should thus be examined to diagnose such a condition.
The belief that massaging is to be looked upon with slander swellings since cancer development and other related tumors may be hurried was unpopular among various writers (Adams et al., 2010). In the literature, both the therapist and the patient principally focused on a whole-body massage. However, certain patients were not able to find a relaxing posture or that such a posture required to be altered eternally, thereby interrupting the treatment procedure and lowering its impact. Overall, the background literature utilized in this study was suitable. Also, the conceptual framework applied was appropriate since the authors used both qualitative and quantitative techniques to exhaustively investigate the effect of massage therapy on patients.
Specific Aims and/or Research Questions and Design
The purpose of the research was to evaluate the impact of the utilization of massage therapies on patient pain degrees in the intensive care environment. The authors carried out their study in a, not for profit public medical center serving a wide local region in Arizona. The hypothesis was consistent with the purpose of the study. However, the setting was likely to contradict the hypothesis held by the authors and therefore influence the results. Socially and economically the setting, a nonprofit health center, would demean the need for massage therapy since many hospitals owned by organizations other than the government provide an atmosphere that consolidates the social networks of all patients. Also, the mixed-method approach was inconsistent with the purpose and/or hypothesis of the research. The authors could have utilized either qualitative or quantitative techniques to minimize internal threats (Adams et al. 2010, p. 4).
Participants
The sample is random, comprising 65 inpatients drawn from clinical, operative, and obstetrics departments. Each patient received a minimum of one and a maximum of three massage sessions lasting between 0.25 hours to 0.75 hours each. The number and length of sessions administered were based on the period that the patient stayed in the hospital and patient availability respectively. Among the participants, 56 (0.87) of the inpatients were women, while 9 (0.13) were men. With regard to ethnicity, 53 (0.82) were white, 7 (0.12) Native American, 3 (0.023) Hispanic, 1 (0.01) African American, and 1 (0.01) Asian. Concerning the medical department, 27 (0.42) were from the clinical department, 22 (0.32) from the operative department, and the remaining 16 (0.26) from the obstetrics section. Overall, the sample had an average age of 45 years. While this represents an excellent combination, the challenge rests with the participants in each category. The number of men is low (12%), the majority are white (53%), and 27 out of 65 participants were from one department. An average combination regarding all groups would have assisted during data analysis, specifically when probing into potential relationships between massage therapy and gender, ethnicity, and hospital department.
The requirement for inclusion and exclusion is based on physician prescription for massage therapies, the inpatient’s capability of completing and signing an inclusion/exclusion form, and the ability of the inpatient to respond to questions before and after the massage therapy. The inclusion criteria applied is suitable since it allows inclusion only if the inpatient is willing.
The tool applied, that is Patient Survey for Massage Therapy Study was generated from a study conducted by Motsinger (Falkensteiner et al., 2011). This survey instrument is utilized to establish the hospital duration, number of massage sessions, and whether massaging had enhanced, had had little or no impact, or had deteriorated the inpatient’s general pain degrees, expressive nature, stamina, willingness to accept massage, relaxing, sleeping ability, and recuperation. Release-ended queries at the final stage of the study enabled inpatients to state freely regarding massage therapy.
Data Collection
The response rate is 53 (81.5%). The scale utilized in gathering data ranged from 0 to 10. This generated a normal degree data group. The scale was given in several physical environments: clinical department, operative section, and obstetrics department. The average score before massaging remained at 5.18 and had a standard deviation of 2.01. After the massage, the average score changed to 2.33 while the standard deviation 2.10. The intrinsic uniformity for each department stood at: 0.82 for medical section; 0.61 for operative; and 0.73 for obstetrics. The data indicate that 0.51 of the sample received one massage; 0.4 got massage 2-3 times, and 0.09 received over 3 sessions of massage. The majority of these sessions (0.84) took 0.5 hours; 0.15 lasted 0.75 hours; and 0.01 took 0.25 hours (Adams et al. 2010, p. 6). Overall, the survey had suitable queries and the rigor of data gathering was consistent with research objectives. However, the study lacked details about the authenticity of the Visual Analog Scale (VAS).
Data Analysis
A t-test was utilized to examine the data for any difference between men and women inpatients regarding pain perception. This is inconsistent with the gathered data. The VAS generated ordinary data, yet a t-test would be appropriate for normal data. A t-test was in addition utilized to analyze the data for variations within sections concerning the kind of massage applied. Significant variation was observed between the 3 sections. Again, since the data is ordinary, a t-test is not a suitable instrument.
Results
The environmental generalizability for the research is somewhat unrealistic. The survey was administered and returned based on free will. However; because the sample is random, the outcomes would be generalizable only within 65 participants. There is no reference sample size for the research. Overall, the data collection, data analysis, and results sections are presented logically.
Overall Evaluation
While this research has value, the methodology needs to be revisited. The authority of the research requires to be enhanced through using a bigger sample. The various possible threats toward intrinsic legality require to be dealt with and reduced as much as possible. In addition, it would be good to be provided with information about the authenticity of the VAS. In the absence of these, it would be not possible to analyze the entire usefulness of this research.
References
Adams, R., White, B. & Beckett, C. (2010). The Effects of Massage Therapy on Pain Management in the Acute Care Setting. International Journal of Therapeutic Massage & Bodywork, 3(1), 1-15.
Charmaz, K. (2003). Qualitative Interviewing and Grounded Theory Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Falkensteiner, M., Mantovan, F., Muller, I., & Them, C. (2011). The Use of Massage Therapy for Reducing Pain, Anxiety, and Depression in Ontological Palliative Care Patients: A Narrative review of the Literature. International Scholarly Research Network, 20(11), 1-8.
Moyer, C. (2009). Effective Massage Therapy. International Journal of Massage Bodywork, 1(2), 4.
Richards, K. (1998). Effect of a Back Massage and Relaxation Intervention on Sleep in Critically ill Patients. Journal of Critical Care, 7(4), 288–299.
Smith, C., Kemp, J., Hemphill, L., & Vojir, C. (2002). Outcomes of Therapeutic Massage for Hospitalized Cancer Patients. Journal of Nursing Scholarships, 34(3), 257–262.