Clinical Study of Acute and Chronic Pain by the Application of Magnetic Resonance Analyser I(TM)

Park, Wook; Jin, Hee Cheol; Cho, Myun Hyun; Yoon, Suk Jun; Lee, Jin Seung; Lee, Jeong Seok; Choi, Surk Hwan; Kim, Sung Yell

Abstract

In 1984, a magnetic resonance spectrometer (magnetic resonance analyser, MRA I(TM)) was developed by Sigrid Lipsett and Ronald J. Weinstock in the USA, Biomedical applications of the spectrometer have been examined by Dr. Hoang Van Duc (pathologist, USC), and Nakamura, et al (Japan). From their theoretical views, the biophysical functions of this machine are to analyse and synthesize a healthy tissue and organ resonance pattern, and to detect and correct an abnormal tissue and organ resonance pattern. All of the above functions are based on Quan tum physics. The healthy tissue and organ resonance patterns are predetermined as standard magnetic resonance patterns by digitizing values based on peak resonance emissions (response levels or high pitched echo-sounds amplified via human body). In clinical practice, a counter or neutralizing resonance pattern calculated by the spectrome ter can correct a phase-shifted resonance pattern (response levels or low pitched echosounds) of a diseased tissue and organ. By administering the counter resonance pattern into the site of pain and trigger point, it is possible to readjust the phaseshifted resonance pattern and then to alleviate pain through regulation of the neurotransmitter function of the nervous system". For assessing clinical effectiveness of pain relief with MRA ITM this study was designed to estimate pain intensity by the patients subjective verbal rating scale (VRS such as graded to no pain, mild, moderate and severe)21 before application of it, to evaluate an amount of pain re lief as applied the spectrometer by the patients subjective pain relief scale (visual analogue scale, VAS, 0 - 100%)", and then to observe a continuation of pain relief following its applica tion for managing acute and chronic pain in the 102 patients during an 8 months period beginning March, 1993. An application time of the spectrometer ranged from 15 to 30 minutes daily in each patient at or near the site of pain and trigger point when the patient wanted to be treated. The sub-jects consisted of 54 males and 48 females, with the age distribution between 23-40 years in 29 cases, 4l-60 years in 48 cases and 61-76 years in 25 cases respectively (Table 1). The kinds of diagnosis and the main site of pain, the duration of pain before the application, and the frequency of its apylication were recorded on the Table 2, 3 and 4. A distinction between acute and chronic pain was defined according to both of the pain intervals lasting within and over 3 months. The results of application of the spectrometer were noted as follows; In, 5l cases of acute pain before the application, the pain intensities were rated mild in 10 cases, moderate in 15 cases and severe in 26 cases. The amounts of pain relief were noted as between 30-50% in 9 cases, 51-70% in l3 cases and 71-95% in 29 cases. The continuation of pain relief appeared between 6-24 hours in two cases, 2-5 days in 10 cases, 6-14 days in 4 cases, 15 days in one case, and completely relived of pain in 34 cases (Table 5-7). In 51 cases of chronic pain before the application, the pain intensities were rated mild in 12 cases, moderate in l8 cases and severe in 21 cases. The amounts of pain relief were noted as between 0-50% in 10 cases, 51-70% in 27 cases and 71-90% in 14 cases. The continuation of pain relief appeared to have no effect in two cases. The level of effective duration was between 6-12 hours in two cases, 2-5 days in 1l cases, 6-14 days in 14 cases, l5-60 days in 9 cases and in 13 cases the patient was complete)y relieved of pain (Table 5-7). There were no complications in the patients except a mild reddening and tingling sensation of skin while applying the spectrometer. Total amounts of pain relief in all of the subjects were accounted as poor and fair in 19 (l8.6%) cases, good in 40 (39.2%) cases and excellent in 43 (42.2%) cases. The clinical effectiveness of MRA h showed variable distributions from no improvements to complete relief of pain by the patients assesment. In conclusion, we suggest that MRA I may be successful in immediate and continued pain relief but still requires several treatments for continued relief and may be gradually effective in pain relief while being applied repeatedly.