BACKGROUND: Spinal cord injury (SCI) survivors often experience constipation, which contributes to a reduced sense of well-being and a lower quality of life. Acupressure offers a non-pharmacological and non-invasive alternative therapy for treating constipation. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the effects of home-based acupressure on constipation and subjective well-being among SCI survivors. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTIONS: This randomized controlled trial randomly assigned 80 adults from Hong Kong with SCI to two study groups. Using a video demonstration filmed by a registered traditional Chinese medicine practitioner, the intervention group performed home-based acupressure (self-administered or caregiver-assisted) twice daily, 15 min/session, for 10 consecutive days. The control group performed manual light touching of the abdomen with the same frequency and duration as the intervention group. Both groups received defecation education through a structured booklet. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: The primary outcome was constipation severity. Secondary outcomes included bowel habits, psychological well-being, and quality of life. Focus group interviews were conducted after the intervention to collect subjective feedback from participants. RESULTS: Significant group-by-time interaction effects on constipation severity (P = 0.005) and quality of life (P = 0.001) revealed that home-based acupressure produced better results than the control. These treatment effects persisted at the one-month follow-up and continued to have a large effect size (Cohen's d > 0.8). Compared to the control group, the acupressure group also had improvements in anxiety (Cohen's d = 0.69) and depression (Cohen's d = 0.72) at the end of the intervention period. Three qualitative categories were identified from the focus group interviews: improvements in bowel function and management; reduced psychological distress following relief from constipation; and acceptability of home-based acupressure. CONCLUSION: Acupressure effectively relieves constipation, enhances psychological well-being, and improves quality of life in people with SCI. These data provide novel evidence supporting the use of home-based acupressure as an acceptable and effective therapy for treating constipation after SCI. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05558657). Please cite this article as: Li MQ, Li Y, Lam W, Yeung WF, Ho YS, Li JY, Sun TC, Yuen S, Hu YL, Yorke J. Home-based acupressure for managing constipation and subjective well-being in spinal cord injury survivors: A randomized controlled trial. J Integr Med. 2025; 23(6):660-669.
Humans ; Acupressure/methods* ; Constipation/psychology* ; Male ; Female ; Spinal Cord Injuries/complications* ; Middle Aged ; Adult ; Quality of Life ; Aged

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.

BACKGROUND:This study aimed to evaluate the discriminatory performance of 11 vital sign-based early warning scores(EWSs)and three shock indices in early sepsis prediction in the emergency department(ED). METHODS:We performed a retrospective study on consecutive adult patients with an infection over 3 months in a public ED in Hong Kong.The primary outcome was sepsis(Sepsis-3 definition)within 48 h of ED presentation.Using c-statistics and the DeLong test,we compared 11 EWSs,including the National Early Warning Score 2(NEWS2),Modified Early Warning Score,and Worthing Physiological Scoring System(WPS),etc.,and three shock indices(the shock index[SI],modified shock index[MSI],and diastolic shock index[DSI]),with Systemic Inflammatory Response Syndrome(SIRS)and quick Sequential Organ Failure Assessment(qSOFA)in predicting the primary outcome,intensive care unit admission,and mortality at different time points. RESULTS:We analyzed 601 patients,of whom 166(27.6%)developed sepsis.NEWS2 had the highest point estimate(area under the receiver operating characteristic curve[AUROC]0.75,95%CI 0.70-0.79)and was significantly better than SIRS,qSOFA,other EWSs and shock indices,except WPS,at predicting the primary outcome.However,the pooled sensitivity and specificity of NEWS2≥5 for the prediction of sepsis were 0.45(95%CI 0.37-0.52)and 0.88(95%CI 0.85-0.91),respectively.The discriminatory performance of all EWSs and shock indices declined when used to predict mortality at a more remote time point. CONCLUSION:NEWS2 compared favorably with other EWSs and shock indices in early sepsis prediction but its low sensitivity at the usual cut-off point requires further modification for sepsis screening.