ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2025
Increasing patient comfort in palliative radiotherapy with a newly developed mattress: a nonrandomized clinical trial.
Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In palliative radiotherapy, many patients experience discomfort and pain during treatment, particularly while lying on flat, hard treatment couches that are considered essential for accurate treatment delivery. Thin foam matts, often used for palliative treatments, can somewhat reduce discomfort, but they are frequently insufficient. Aim: In this study a mattress was developed and investigated, with the aim to reduce pain during radiotherapy treatments without affecting treatment quality. Methods: A nonrandomized clinical trial compared the newly designed RTComfort mattress with a standard thin foam matt. The primary endpoint was mattress preference, while secondary endpoints included experienced pain, positioning stability, and dosimetric effects. Included patients tested both the mat and mattress for one minute each in the treatment position before planning-CT acquisition, scoring their preference and pain on a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS, 0-10). Subsequently, patients were scanned and treated on their preferred option. Positioning stability during treatment was evaluated using optical surface scanning and dosimetric effects were evaluated through dose calculations with the treatment planning system. Results: Out of 45 patients, 44 (98 %) preferred the RTComfort mattress, with 35 patients showing a strong preference (p < 0.0001). The median pain score on the RTComfort mattress decreased from 4.8 (IQR: 2.0-6.1) to 2.0 (IQR: 0.4 to 4.0 NRS) (p < 0.0001). Both options showed negligible patient sagging, with marginally less on the RTComfort mattress (p < 0.0001). No relevant dosimetric effects were observed. Conclusions: This prospective clinical trial highlights the need for more comfortable radiotherapy treatments. Compared to the standard thin foam matt, 98% of patients preferred the RTComfort mattress. The RTComfort mattress provided clinically significant reduction in pain associated with lying on flat, hard treatment couches. The mattress is safe for clinical use and shows potential beyond palliative radiotherapy settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.