Copyright
©The Author(s) 2024.
World J Psychiatry. May 19, 2024; 14(5): 678-685
Published online May 19, 2024. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v14.i5.678
Published online May 19, 2024. doi: 10.5498/wjp.v14.i5.678
Table 1 Comparison of baseline data, n (%)
Baseline data | Group S (n = 35) | Group L (n = 35) | t/χ2 | P value |
Age (yr) | 28.20 ± 3.76 | 29.66 ± 3.04 | 1.786 | 0.078 |
Body mass index (kg/m2) | 23.05 ± 2.78 | 22.76 ± 2.75 | 0.439 | 0.662 |
Delivery method | 0.057 | 0.811 | ||
Cesarean section | 17 (48.57) | 16 (45.71) | ||
Spontaneous labor | 18 (51.43) | 19 (54.29) | ||
Pelvic floor muscle strength grading | 0.473 | 0.789 | ||
Level 3 | 10 (28.57) | 11 (31.43) | ||
Level 4 | 19 (54.29) | 20 (57.14) | ||
Level 5 | 6 (17.14) | 4 (11.43) |
Table 2 Comparison of distance between rectus abdominis muscles
Group | n | 3 cm above umbilicus | Navel midline | 3 cm below umbilicus | |||
Before treatment | After treatment | Before treatment | After treatment | Before treatment | After treatment | ||
Group S | 35 | 3.24 ± 0.51 | 1.86 ± 0.24 | 3.75 ± 0.66 | 2.01 ± 0.33 | 2.23 ± 0.56 | 1.71 ± 0.32 |
Group L | 35 | 3.23 ± 0.93 | 1.65 ± 0.31 | 3.67 ± 1.09 | 1.78 ± 0.18 | 2.43 ± 0.66 | 1.55 ± 0.19 |
t value | 0.056 | 3.169 | 0.371 | 3.777 | 1.367 | 2.486 | |
P value | 0.996 | 0.002 | 0.711 | < 0.001 | 0.176 | 0.015 |
Table 3 Comparison of abdominal circumference index
Group | n | 3 cm above umbilicus | Navel midline | 3 cm below umbilicus | |||
Before treatment | After treatment | Before treatment | After treatment | Before treatment | After treatment | ||
Group S | 35 | 83.83 ± 7.08 | 82.86 ± 7.67 | 85.73 ± 7.93 | 84.43 ± 7.73 | 87.26 ± 7.41 | 86.17 ± 7.84 |
Group L | 35 | 83.29 ± 7.26 | 79.60 ± 4.75 | 84.39 ± 7.36 | 80.90 ± 5.10 | 86.40 ± 7.53 | 82.79 ± 5.43 |
t value | 0.315 | 2.138 | 0.733 | 2.255 | 0.482 | 2.097 | |
P value | 0.754 | 0.036 | 0.466 | 0.027 | 0.632 | 0.039 |
Table 4 Comparison of lower back pain visual analog scale scores
Group | n | Lower back pain VAS score | |
Before treatment | After treatment | ||
Group S | 35 | 2.57 ± 1.29 | 1.26 ± 0.74 |
Group L | 35 | 2.51 ± 1.36 | 0.77 ± 0.59 |
t value | 0.19 | 3.063 | |
P value | 0.85 | 0.003 |
Table 5 Comparison of Edinburgh postpartum depression scale scores
Group | n | EPDS score | |
Before treatment | After treatment | ||
Group S | 35 | 9.86 ± 2.37 | 9.03 ± 1.28 |
Group L | 35 | 9.92 ± 2.41 | 8.24 ± 1.06 |
t value | 0.105 | 2.812 | |
P value | 0.917 | 0.006 |
- Citation: Chen Y, Sun XY, Qian C, Zhang XX, Zhou YJ, Zhang HY, Xie ZW. Therapeutic effect of manual massage on early postpartum rectus abdominis separation and postpartum depression. World J Psychiatry 2024; 14(5): 678-685
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2220-3206/full/v14/i5/678.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.5498/wjp.v14.i5.678