0046d0751406358b682ca59c8d242a44
0046d0751406358b682ca59c8d242a44
0046d0751406358b682ca59c8d242a44
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Pranic Complementary Therapy Efficacy to Improve Severe
Insomnia and Enhance Sleep Quality
ORIGINALITY REPORT
12 %
SIMILARITY INDEX
9%
INTERNET SOURCES
7%
PUBLICATIONS
4%
STUDENT PAPERS
3%
www.science.gov
Internet Source
DOI: https://doi.org/10.52403/ijrr.20230401
Inclusion
105
Exclusion
25
Total Subjects
80
Simple
Randomization
Most of the patients in both groups had Table 1. The basic characteristic of study subjects
With pranic Without pranic
senior high school level of formal therapy n (%) therapy n (%)
education, namely 27 patients (67.5%) in Mean age (years old) 45.15 40.5
Sex
the pranic therapy group and 23 patients Male 13 (32.5) 20 (50)
(57.5%) in the control group. There are 5 Female 27 (67.5) 20 (50)
Level of education
groups of jobs, in which traders were Elementary school 0 (0) 3 (7.5)
predominated in the pranic therapy group Junior high school 4 (10) 3 (7.5)
(32.5%) and entrepreneurs were dominated Senior high school 27 (67.5) 23 (57.5)
University 9 (22.5) 11 (27.5)
in the group without pranic therapy (62.5%). Jobs
Unemployment 12 (30) 4 (10)
Farmer 2 (5) 2 (5)
Entrepreneur 10 (25) 25 (62.5)
Government employee 3 (7.5) 2 (5)
Trader 13 (32.5) 7 (17.5)
The normality test is conducted to determine intervention group, which was shown with a
whether the data is distributed normally or significance value below 0.05, thus data
abnormally before performing the statistical were processed using the Wilcoxon test,
test. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test of while the variables in the control group
normality in this study showed abnormal were normally distributed so that the
data on each variable in the pranic hypothesis test was carried out with a t-test.
Table 2. Wilcoxon Test of pre/post PSQI and ISI score in Intervention Group (pranic therapy)
PSQI ISI
Pre Post p Pre Post p
Mean±SD 17.37±1.996 4.8±3.220 0.000* 25.63±3.271 2.08±2.615 0.000*
(max-min) (13-21) (2-16) (16-28) (0-6)
Notes : *statistically significant
PSQI : Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
ISI : Insomnia Severity Index
Table 2 have shown that the mean total intervention group before and after therapy
PSQI score in the pranic intervention group also decreased significantly, which indicates
has decreased significantly. This result that there was a significant clinical
suggests that there was a significant improvement in the severe degree of
improvement in sleep quality in the group insomnia in the pranic complementary
that obtained complementary therapy prana. therapy group.
The total score for ISI in the pranic
Table 3. T-test of pre/post PSQI and ISI score in the control group (without pranic therapy)
PSQI ISI
Pre Post p Pre Post p
Mean±SD 16.27±2.002 16.13±3.220 0.460* 24.4±2.639 25.05±2.708 0.001*
(max-min) 10-20) (2-16) (17-28) (17-28)
Notes : *statistically significant
PSQI : Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
ISI : Insomnia Severity Index
T-test results in Table 3 showed that the was processed using the Wilcoxon test.
mean score of PSQI score before and after There was a decrease in ISI scores to zero in
therapy without pranic therapy is decreased all components in subjects of the pranic
but not significant, which means that there therapy group. In the group without pranic
is an insignificant improvement in sleep therapy, some components did not reach a
quality. In contrast to the mean ISI score score of zero, namely components of
which increased significantly before and waking up early and being satisfied with
after therapy without pranic therapy. current sleep patterns. None of the subjects
Assessment of each component of the ISI in the pranic therapy group complained of
questionnaire can be seen in Table 4. The waking up earlier at the time of the post-
Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality test intervention assessment, while there were
showed that data on each variable was still 10 subjects (25%) who complained of
abnormal, which was shown with a waking up earlier in the mild degree in the
significance value below 0.05, so the data group without pranic therapy.
On the assessment using the PSQI 1.65 ± 0.48). There were still 13 subjects
questionnaire per component can be seen in (32.5%) in the group without prana who had
Table 5, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov/ Shapiro- not achieved maximum satisfaction in
Wilk normality test showed that data on overall sleep quality, while maximum
each variable was abnormal with a satisfaction was achieved in the group with
significance value below 0.05, thus data was pranic therapy. There is a significant
processed using the Wilcoxon test. The difference between pre and post in each
results of the statistical test per component variable, which is indicated by a
showed a decrease in PSQI scores to zero in significance value of <0.001 in each
almost all components in the subject group component. Except for the variables "feeling
with the administration of pranic therapy. pain" and "how often to take the drug to fall
There were still 23 subjects (57.5%) in the asleep", there was no significant difference
pranic therapy group and 26 subjects (65%) shown with a significance value of 1.00
had not achieved maximum satisfaction in (more than 0.05). There was no significant
being passionate about doing something. decrease in scores and differences in the
The mean decrease in intervention pre-post components of "feeling pain" and "how
scores on this variable was higher in the often to take medications to fall asleep"
group with pranic therapy (2 ± 0 to 1.57 ± because of subjects since pre-intervention
0.5) than the pre-post intervention score in had been given a score of zero.
the group without pranic therapy (2 ± 0 to
The psychological condition of the study subjects of both groups before and after the
intervention can be seen in Table 6.
Table 6. Statistical test of the psychological condition of the Pranic Intervention group
HDRS HARS
Pre Post p Pre Post p
37.32±9.794 1.68±1.309 0.000* 42.17±8.406 1.45±1.839 0.000*
(13-50) (0-4) (17-54) (0-4)
Notes : *statistically significant
HDRS : Hamilton Depression Rating Scale
HARS : Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale
******