Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2004 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Poletto, Patrícia Rios |
| Orientador(a): |
Coury, Helenice Jane Cote Gil
 |
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Federal de São Carlos
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Pós-Graduação em Fisioterapia - PPGFt
|
| Departamento: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
| País: |
BR
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://repositorio.ufscar.br/handle/20.500.14289/5235
|
Resumo: |
Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WMDS) are responsible for work absence and high costs in compensations in Brazil. Its diagnostic is important because it is used to guide clinical and legal decisions. The report of pain is the usual element to describe this syndrome, so the pain assessment is essential. Therefore, the purposes of this research were: to compare provocative tests (pressure algometry and manual palpation) and subjective reports of pain (pain scales); to identify the sensitivity of different procedures and its individual contribution to the pain phenomenon. Hundred thirty four women, workers in industrial line of production were evaluated; among them were recruited 83, with mean age of 33,4 +- 6,67 years, that manifested pain caused by WMDS. An anamnesis questionary was used in this research, with the pain being measured by numeric and verbal descriptive scales, manual palpation, and pressure algometry. The analyses of the data were descriptive, and were performed Spearman’s correlation tests, and ordinal logistic regression. According to the results, the evaluated population may be classified as synthomatic by all the instruments used in this research. Regarding the provocative tests the pressure algometry was more sensitive than manual palpation (90 and 80% being identified as sintomatic subjects, respectively). The correlation coefficient between the pain scales was good (r = 0,74), and between the manual palpation and pressure algometry was poor (r = -0,38), but statistically significant (p<0,05). Otherwise, the association of the provocative tests (pressure algometry and manual palpation) with the subjective reports of pain (pain scales) was poor a regular (r= -0,26 – 0,51; p<0,05). The regression analyses demonstrated that the manual palpation, among all the instruments used, was the only one efficient in classifying the population through the pain scales. The results suggest the need for the application of a provocative test in association with subjective reports of pain when a better characterization of WMDS is concerned. |
