Summary of findings 3. Massage versus no intervention for people receiving dialysis.
| Massage versus no intervention for people receiving dialysis | ||||||
|
Patient or population: people receiving dialysis Settings: multinational Intervention: massage Comparison: no intervention | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No. of participants (RCTs) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| No intervention | Massage | |||||
|
Fatigue (PFS, FSS, VAS) median follow‐up: 0.9 months |
The mean score for fatigue ranged across control groups from 5.17 to 80.74 (PFS, FSS, or VAS scores) | The mean fatigue in the intervention group was 1.06 lower than the control group (95% CI 1.47 lower to 0.65 lower) | ‐‐ | 657 (7) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1,2,3 | Massage may improve fatigue compared to not intervention in people undergoing HD |
| Weakness | Not reported | Not reported | ‐‐ | ‐‐ | ‐‐ | No studies reported this outcome |
|
Energy (VAS) median follow‐up: 0.9 months |
The mean score for energy ranged across control groups from 18.93 to 21.97 (VAS) | The mean energy in the intervention group was 4.87 more than the control group (95% CI 1.69 more to 8.06more) | ‐‐ | 152 (2) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝ low1,3 | Massage may increase energy compared to not intervention in people undergoing HD |
| Tiredness | Not reported | Not reported | ‐‐ | ‐‐ | ‐‐ | No studies reported this outcome |
| Exhaustion | Not reported | Not reported | ‐‐ | ‐‐ | ‐‐ | No studies reported this outcome |
| Asthenia | Not reported | Not reported | ‐‐ | ‐‐ | ‐‐ | No studies reported this outcome |
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% CI) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI). CI: Confidence interval; RR: Risk Ratio; PFS: Piper Fatigue Scale; FSS: Fatigue Severity Scale; VAS: Visual Analogue Scale; HD: haemodialysis. | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect. Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate. Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate. Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. | ||||||
1 Evidence certainty was downgraded by one level due to study limitations
2 Evidence certainty was downgraded by one level due to imprecision (Optimal Information Size (OIS)) not met and indirectness in outcome measure
3 Evidence certainty was downgraded by one level due to inconsistency