Copyright
©The Author(s) 2022.
World J Clin Cases. Nov 16, 2022; 10(32): 11753-11765
Published online Nov 16, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i32.11753
Published online Nov 16, 2022. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v10.i32.11753
Group | Sex | Age | Pretest | |||||
Men | Women | VAS | PPI | PRI | PRI sensory | PRI affective | ||
CG (n = 55) | 15 | 40 | 52.62 ± 13.62 | 5 (4-7) | 3 (1-3) | 7 (4-11) | 4 (3-7) | 2 (1-4) |
EG (n = 58) | 16 | 42 | 50.74 ± 13.33 | 5 (4-7) | 3 (1-3) | 7 (4.75-10.25) | 5.5 (3.75-8.25) | 2 (1-3) |
Test statistic | χ2 = 0.001 | t = 0.740 | Z = 0.911 | Z = 0.800 | Z = 0.823 | Z = 1.199 | Z = 0.049 | |
P value | 0.97 | 0.46 | 0.36 | 0.42 | 0.411 | 0.231 | 0.961 |
- Citation: Xiao J, Cao BY, Xie Z, Ji YX, Zhao XL, Yang HJ, Zhuang W, Sun HH, Liang WM. Clinical efficacy of electromagnetic field therapy combined with traditional Chinese pain-reducing paste in myofascial pain syndrome. World J Clin Cases 2022; 10(32): 11753-11765
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v10/i32/11753.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v10.i32.11753