Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36475098›Full record

ArticleTurkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation2022

Comparison of the efficacy of mud-pack and hot-pack treatments in chronic non-specific neck pain: A single-blind, randomized-controlled study.

Fatih Karaarslan, Halim Yılmaz, Halil Ekrem Akkurt, Fatih Muhammed Kaya, Esra Şafak Yılmaz

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. H-WavePain and therapy · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Does hot pack application change the morphology of the median and ulnar nerves?Turkish journal of physical medicine and rehabilitation · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Fatih KaraarslanDepartment of Medical Ecology and Hydroclimatology, University of Health Sciences, Gülhane Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-1107-5887
Halim YılmazDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Health Sciences, Konya Training and Research Hospital, Konya, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-5521-1214
Halil Ekrem AkkurtDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Health Sciences, Konya Training and Research Hospital, Konya, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-7983-6614
Fatih Muhammed KayaDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Health Sciences, Konya Training and Research Hospital, Konya, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0002-3198-7173
Esra Şafak YılmazDepartment of Medical Informatic, University of Health Sciences, Gülhane Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Türkiye.ORCID 0000-0003-2715-4600
University of Health Science · KHGülhane Askerî Tıp Akademisi · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to compare the short-term efficacy of mud-pack (MP) and hot-pack (HP) treatments with the same temperature and duration on sleep, function, depression, and quality of life for chronic non-specific neck pain (CNNP) patients. Patients and methods: Between December 2018 and September 2019, a total of 70 patients with CNNP diagnosis (12 males, 58 females; mean age: 50.2±9.4 years; range, 24 to 65 years) were included. The patients were divided into two groups. The MP group (n=35) had a total of 15 sessions of MP for 20 min + transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) for 20 min + home exercise (HE) on five days per week for three weeks. The HP group (n=35) had 15 similar sessions of HP for 20 min + TENS for 20 min + HE. The patients were assessed with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS-pain), VAS physician's and patient's global assessments, modified Neck Disability Index (mNDI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and Short Form-36 (SF-36) measures before treatment, at the end of post-treatment third week and one month later. Results: In the MP group, there were statistically significant improvements in all parameters at the end of treatment three-week and one-month follow-up (p<0.05), apart from SF-36 Vitality/Energy (SF-36V/E) at the end of treatment and SF-36 General Health (SF-36GH) at one month. In the HP group, there were statistically significant improvements observed for all parameters (p<0.05), apart from the SF-36 Physical Role and SF-36GH at the end of treatment third week and SF-36V/E at the first-month assessment. The VAS-pain(p<0.001), mNDI (p=0.019), BDI (p=0.002), SF-36GH (p<0.001), SF-36V/E (p<0.001) and SF-36 mental health (p<0.001) showed statistically significantly superior improvements in the MP group (p<0.05). Conclusion: In CNNP patients, both MP and HP treatments are effective. However, MP therapy has more positive effects on pain, function, depression, and quality of life parameters. The MP treatment may be used in addition to TENS treatment for CNNP patients.

Indexed as

Chronic neck painhome exercisehot packmud packthermotherapy.

Identifiers

PMID36475098
PMCPMC9706788
OpenAlexW4310959156

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.