4.6 Article

Ginger compress therapy for adults with osteoarthritis

期刊

JOURNAL OF ADVANCED NURSING
卷 66, 期 10, 页码 2225-2233

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05355.x

关键词

ginger compress therapy; Giorgi's method; nursing; osteoarthritis; phenomenology

类别

资金

  1. Australian government
  2. ECU, Western Australia
  3. Mahle-Stiftung GmbH, Stuttgart, Germany
  4. Phytomed Medicinal Herbs Ltd, New Zealand

向作者/读者索取更多资源

P>Aim. This paper is a report of a study to explicate the phenomenon of ginger compresses for people with osteoarthritis. Background. Osteoarthritis is claimed to be the leading cause of musculoskeletal pain and disability in Western society. Management ideally combines non-pharmacological strategies, including complementary therapies and pain-relieving medication. Ginger has been applied externally for over a thousand years in China to manage arthritis symptoms. Method. Husserlian phenomenological methodology was used and the data were collected in 2007. Ten purposively selected adults who had suffered osteoarthritis for at least a year kept daily diaries and made drawings, and follow-up interviews and telephone conversations were conducted. Findings. Seven themes were identified in the data: (1) Meditative-like stillness and relaxation of thoughts; (2) Constant penetrating warmth throughout the body; (3) Positive change in outlook; (4) Increased energy and interest in the world; (5) Deeply relaxed state that progressed to a gradual shift in pain and increased interest in others; (6) Increased suppleness within the body and (7) More comfortable, flexible joint mobility. The essential experience of ginger compresses exposed the unique qualities of heat, stimulation, anti-inflammation and analgesia. Conclusion. Nurses could consider this therapy as part of a holistic treatment for people with osteoarthritis symptoms. Controlled research is needed with larger numbers of older people to explore further the effects of the ginger compress therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据