CLINICAL RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATION ABSTRACTS
Please note: All posters will be displayed in Salons 10-12.

FRIDAY, 5:45-6:30 PM


Menard MB.

Immediate effect of massage on pain sensation and unpleasantness: a case series.

Potomac Massage Training Institute mmenard@pmti.org

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of therapeutic massage on pain, and test the feasibility of using a case series design to conduct practice-based CAM research.

METHODS: From May 1999 to December 2003, every first time client (n =116) who complained of pain during the initial intake was routinely assessed for pain sensation and unpleasantness using a visual analog scale (VAS) as part of their intake interview, and again following the massage session. Clients were informed that information gathered during the intake would be used for research purposes, and no client declined to have their information included. To reduce bias, only new clients without prior relationship to the therapist were eligible for inclusion. During the interview, the concepts of pain sensation and unpleasantness were explained using a script. Clients were asked to rate their current level of pain using the VAS and were told that they would be asked to do so again after the massage as a measure to evaluate the massage. Massage treatment was individualized to each client, however the duration of the massage was standardized (60 minutes). Techniques used included Swedish massage, deep tissue, myofascial release, counterstrain and positional release techniques, and energy work, based on the therapist's judgment and client feedback during the session. Mean pain scores before and after massage were compared using paired t-tests.

RESULTS: 94 women and 22 men ranging in age from 18 to 86 participated. Average age was 42, with a median age of 41. Most participants were white, with 3 Asian, 1 African-American, and 1 Hispanic/Latino. The majority of clients complained of musculoskeletal back pain (n =55) and neck pain (n =26), followed by shoulders (n =16). Mean pain sensation decreased from 3.76 (sd 1.87) prior to massage to .89 (sd 1.35) following massage, with t =18.87, p <.001. Mean pain unpleasantness decreased from 5.21 (sd 2.48) prior to massage to .64 (sd 1.23) following massage, with t =20.45, p <.001. Effect sizes were 1.76 and 1.90, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS: While the lack of a control group means that magnitude of treatment effect is likely to be overestimated, the results are still striking, particularly the reduction in pain unpleasantness. Massage shows promise as an intervention for reducing pain. The case series design is a feasible method for CAM practitioners to conduct practice-based research.

 

Back