Comparative Efficacy of Robotic and Manual Massage Interventions on Performance and Well-Being: A Randomized Crossover Trial.

BACKGROUND

Manual massage (MM) interventions can improve psychophysiological states of relaxation and well-being. In this context, robotic massage (RM) represents a promising, but currently understudied, solution.

HYPOTHESIS

Both MM and RM would improve flexibility of the hamstrings and lumbopelvic muscles and promote a psychophysiological state of relaxation through decreased sympathetic activity.

STUDY DESIGN

Single-blind randomized crossover trial.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 2.

METHODS

A total of 21 participants experienced 2 massage interventions targeting back soft tissues. During a first condition, the intervention was performed by a physical therapist, whereas during a second condition the intervention was performed by a robot. We collected objective and subjective indexes of performances and well-being before and after each massage intervention. We also collected physical therapists' self-reports of perceived fatigue, tension, and ability to maintain the massage routine.

RESULTS

Skin conductance decreased from the pretest to the posttest in both conditions (partial = 0.44, 95% CI [0.30, 1.00], < 0.01), although the decrease was more pronounced after MM. Whereas both interventions were associated with improved subjective sensations, eg, pain, warmth, well-being (partial = 0.08, 95% CI [0.06, 1.00], < 0.01), MM yielded additional benefits compared with RM. The physical therapist reported greater fatigue and tension and reduced perceived massage efficiency along with repeated massage interventions. MM outperformed RM to elicit a psychophysiological state of relaxation.

CONCLUSION

RM exhibited a pattern of changes comparable with that of MM, for both objective and subjective indexes of relaxation and well-being.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

RM could represent a prophylactic option to prevent the onset of counterproductive fatigability in physical therapists.