Background Primary dysmenorrhea (PD) is the most common complaint in young women and adolescents. Side effects of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs can limit their use. Therefore, non-pharmacological pain relief methods such as auriculotherapy may play an important role in PD management. This study was conducted to compare the effect of auriculotherapy and mefenamic acid on the severity and systemic symptoms of PD. Methods In a randomized clinical trial, 83 students were randomized into two groups. In the auriculotherapy group, electrical stimulation of the ear was conducted once a week for two menstrual cycles. In each cycle close to menstruation, ear seeds were inserted on pressure points to be pressed in times of pain. In the mefenamic acid group, subjects took mefenamic acid capsules upon seeing the initial symptoms of menstruation until the pain reduces. The primary outcomes were mean pain intensity and systemic symptoms associated with it. Pain intensity was measured through the visual analog scale (VAS) and the verbal multidimensional scoring system (VMS). Systemic symptoms were assessed using VMS, as well as the yes/no question form. Results Mean pain intensity with the VAS was significantly lower in the auriculotherapy group than the mefenamic acid group in the first and second cycles of intervention. There was a significant difference in VMS grade between both groups during the second cycle of intervention. In terms of the systemic symptoms in the second cycle of intervention, no subjects had dysmenorrhea grade 3 (common systemic symptoms) in the auriculotherapy group. Whereas in the mefenamic acid group, 16.7% of the subjects still had dysmenorrhea grade 3. There was no significant difference between the two groups in the frequency of systemic symptoms of PD. There was a significant decrease in the frequency of fatigue and diarrhea in both groups. However, there was a significant reduction in the frequency of nausea, headache, and anger in the auriculotherapy group. Conclusion Mean pain intensity with the VAS was lower with the auriculotherapy. Also, 65.9% of auriculotherapy group subjects were in the dysmenorrhea grades 0 and 1. Therefore, auriculotherapy is recommended because of its fewer complications and more effect on PD. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov IRCT20181207041873N1. Registered on February 24, 2019. https://en.irct.ir/user/trial/35967/view
Background: Since there was no study on the effect of auriculotherapy on reducing the use of oxytocin and labor length, the present study is aimed to investigate this issue. Methods: The present study was a randomized clinical trial with two parallel arms, without blinding, which was performed on 93 nulliparous women. Setting this study was done in one of the referral hospitals in Qom, Iran. The samples were randomly assigned to two groups: oxytocin (n=47) or auriculotherapy and oxytocin (n=46). After hospitalization of mothers in the active phase, in one group, 10-unit oxytocin was administered for augmentation, and in the second intervention group, the auriculotherapy technique, in addition to oxytocin, was performed. the master points zero, Shenmen, endocrine, thalamic, uterine, prostaglandin points, vagina on the earlobe area. The points were stimulated with the Pointer Plus electric device for 30 seconds, and 60 minutes later, the other ear was stimulated. The results were analyzed by SPSS 22, T-test statistical analysis, and Chi-square test. Results: Regarding the main purpose of the study, the results showed that the length of the active phase indicated a significant decrease in the auriculotherapy group compared to the oxytocin group (244.86± 64.19 vs. 284± 62.75, p=0.01). The other purpose of the study showed that the mean of oxytocin consumption significantly decreased in the auriculotherapy group. Conclusion: It seems that auriculotherapy is an appropriate alternative method for labor augmentation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.