↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Pilot study: rapidly cycling hypobaric pressure improves pain after 5 days in adiposis dolorosa

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, August 2010
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (91st percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (62nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
patent
2 patents
facebook
2 Facebook pages
wikipedia
3 Wikipedia pages

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Pilot study: rapidly cycling hypobaric pressure improves pain after 5 days in adiposis dolorosa
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, August 2010
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s12351
Pubmed ID
Authors

Karen L Herbst, Thomas Rutledge

Abstract

Adiposis dolorosa (AD) is a rare disorder of painful nodular subcutaneous fat accompanied by fatigue, difficulty with weight loss, inflammation, increased fluid in adipose tissue (lipedema and lymphedema), and hyperalgesia. Sequential compression relieves lymphedema pain; we therefore hypothesized that whole body cyclic pneumatic hypobaric compression may relieve pain in AD. To avoid exacerbating hyperalgesia, we utilized a touch-free method, which is delivered via a high-performance altitude simulator, the Cyclic Variations in Altitude Conditioning™ (CVAC™) process. As a pilot study, 10 participants with AD completed pain and quality of life questionnaires before and after 20-40 minutes of CVAC process daily for 5 days. Participants lost weight (195.5 ± 17.6-193.8 ± 17.3 lb; P = 0.03), and bioimpedance significantly decreased (510 ± 36-490 ± 38 ohm; P = 0.01). There was a significant decrease in scores on the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (P = 0.039), in average (P = 0.002), highest (P = 0.029), lowest (P = 0.04), and current pain severity (P = 0.02) on the Visual Analogue Scale, but there was no change in pain quality by the McGill Pain Questionnaire. There were no significant changes in total and physical SF-36 scores, but the mental score improved significantly (P = 0.049). There were no changes in the Pain Disability Index or Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. These data present a potential, new, noninvasive means of treating pain in AD by whole body pneumatic compression as part of the CVAC process. Although randomized, controlled trials are needed to confirm these data, the CVAC process could potentially help in treating AD pain and other chronic pain disorders.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 31 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 7 23%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 16%
Other 4 13%
Student > Master 3 10%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 4 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 13 42%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 16%
Psychology 3 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Engineering 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 7 23%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 June 2020.
All research outputs
#2,199,415
of 22,699,621 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#261
of 1,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#8,198
of 94,301 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#3
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,699,621 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,736 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 94,301 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.