Use the Back button in your browser to see the other results of your search or to select another record.
| Hot pack therapy versus cherry seed pillow in fibromyalgia patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial |
| Akpinar NB, Gercek H, Yuce U, Bagcaci S |
| Revista da Associacao Medica Brasileira [Journal of the Brazilian Medical Association] 2025 Sep;71(8):e20250365 |
| clinical trial |
| This trial has not yet been rated. |
|
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a cherry seed pillow on pain and quality of life in fibromyalgia patients. METHODS: This study used a pretest-posttest, randomized, and controlled prospective research design. It was conducted between December 2023 and February 2024 in the physiotherapy clinic of a private hospital. A total of 72 adults with fibromyalgia were randomly assigned to the cherry seed (n = 36) and control (n = 36) groups. Both groups received conventional physiotherapy 5 days a week for 4 weeks. A cherry seed pillow (microwave-heated) was used in the cherry seed group. A hot pack was applied to the control group. The data were collected using a personal information form, Visual Analog Scale, and Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire. RESULTS: The change in the participants' resting pain before and after the treatment decreased in both the treatment (p < 0.001, d 0.86) and control (p < 0.001, d 0.97) groups. The change in activity pain decreased in the intervention (p < 0.001, d 0.79) and control (p < 0.001, d 0.87) groups. Similarly, there was a decrease in night pain in the intervention (p < 0.001, d 0.86) and control (p < 0.001, d 0.89) groups. The change in Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire scores of the participants showed a decrease in the intervention (p < 0.001, d 3.90) and control (p < 0.001, 30.03, d 4.28) groups. CONCLUSION: Both groups showed a reduction in pain, likely due to the combined effect of heat and physiotherapy; however, the clinical improvement was more significant in the control group, suggesting that the cherry seed pillow was less effective.
|