Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36834436›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

The Effect of Two Types of Back Pillow Support on Transversus Abdominis and Internal Oblique Muscle Fatigue, Patient Satisfaction, and Discomfort Score during Prolonged Sitting.

Rungthip Puntumetakul, Thiwaphon Chatprem, Pongsatorn Saiklang, Arisa Leungbootnak

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Rungthip PuntumetakulDepartment of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand.
Thiwaphon ChatpremDepartment of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand.
Pongsatorn SaiklangDivision of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Physical Therapy, Srinakharinwiroj University, Nakhon Nayok 26120, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0003-2029-7895
Arisa LeungbootnakHuman Movement Sciences, Department of Physical Therapy, Faculty of Associated Medical Sciences, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen 40002, Thailand.ORCID 0000-0002-2566-4642
Khon Kaen University · THSrinakharinwirot University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Natural rubber is considered an economic plant in Thailand and is used to manufacture many products. Foam back pillows have proven to have various benefits for the lower back. However, no study has compared the effects of foam and rubber pillows. Therefore, the current study aimed to compare the efficacy of foam and rubber pillows on transversus abdominis and internal oblique muscle fatigue, patient satisfaction, and discomfort scores during 60 min of prolonged sitting. Thirty healthy participants were invited to the study and randomized into three sitting conditions over three consecutive days. The three groups were as follows: control, foam pillow, and rubber pillow. Our results revealed that the discomfort score increased with the sitting time in all three groups (

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionRubberAbdominal MusclesAbdominal Oblique MusclesHumansMuscle, SkeletalRubberdeep trunk muscle fatiguediscomfort scorefoam back pillowpatients’ satisfactionrubber back pillow

Identifiers

PMID36834436
PMCPMC9964691
OpenAlexW4321373155

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.