MedPath

Effects of Warm & Cold Therapy with Modified Thermoelectric Element Tourniquet application on Pain, Stress, Blood Flow and Satisfaction During Intravenous injection in Hospital Patients

Not Applicable
Completed
Conditions
Not Applicable
Registration Number
KCT0008538
Lead Sponsor
Eulji University
Brief Summary

The results of this study are as follows. Hypothesis 1 of Hypothesis 1: “There will be a difference in pain between the experimental group to which warm and cold therapy with M-TEE Tourniquet was applied during intravenous injection and the control group to which only M-TEE Tourniquet was applied.” It appeared to be present and was supported (F=3.382, p<.05). 2nd hypothesis to 1st hypothesis: “There will be differences in pain between the experimental group to which heat therapy and cold therapy with M-TEE Tourniquet were applied and the control group to which only M-TEE Tourniquet was applied during intravenous injection.” Observed oxygen saturation and pulse rate was rejected as there was no difference (F=0.701, p>.05) (F=0.520, p>.05) 2nd hypothesis: “There will be a difference in perceived stress between the experimental group that received warm and cold therapy with M-TEE Tourniquet during intravenous injection and the control group that only applied M-TEE Tourniquet.” (F=2.359, p>.05). 3rd Hypothesis: During intravenous injection, there will be a difference in blood flow between the experimental group to which hot and cold therapy with M-TEE Tourniquet was applied and the control group to which only M-TEE Tourniquet was applied.” There was no difference in blood flow (F=2.165, p>.05) ( F=0.702, p>.05). However, as a result of comparing the difference in blood flow before and after the application of M-TEE Tourniquet, the warm therapy group showed a significant difference compared to the cold therapy group (F=5.991, P<.05). In addition, as a result of analyzing the changes in venous blood flow before and after the experimental treatment through repeated measures ANOVA, there was a significant difference in the interaction between time and group (F=5.991, p=.004), which was partially supported. Hypothesis 4: "There will be a difference in subject satisfaction between the warm therapy group, cold therapy group applied with M-TEE Tourniquet during intravenous injection, and the control group with only M-TEE Tourniquet applied." 3.258, p<.05). Hypothesis 5: “Satisfaction with M-TEE Tourniquet for patients who performed intravenous injection after applying warm and cold therapy with M-TEE Tourniquet during intravenous injection, and intravenous injection practitioners who performed intravenous injection with only M-TEE Touniquet will have a difference.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
Completed
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
59
Inclusion Criteria

Adults receiving intravenous injections among inpatients
1. An adult aged 20 or older and 65 or younger who accepted the participation after hearing the explanation about this study and can communicate
2. Those who have experienced intravenous injection within 6 months
3. prospective intravenous injection

Exclusion Criteria

1.Those who perform other treatments to relieve pain during intravenous injection
2. Persons with mental illness who have difficulty making judgments
3. Those with hypersensitivity to hot and cold
4. Those who are taking medications that can affect pain and stress

Study & Design

Study Type
Interventional Study
Study Design
Not specified
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath