↓ Skip to main content

The physical and physiological effects of vacuum massage on the different skin layers: a current status of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Burns & Trauma, September 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Readers on

mendeley
106 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The physical and physiological effects of vacuum massage on the different skin layers: a current status of the literature
Published in
Burns & Trauma, September 2016
DOI 10.1186/s41038-016-0053-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter Moortgat, Mieke Anthonissen, Jill Meirte, Ulrike Van Daele, Koen Maertens

Abstract

Vacuum massage is a non-invasive mechanical massage technique performed with a mechanical device that lifts the skin by means of suction, creates a skin fold and mobilises that skin fold. In the late 1970s, this therapy was introduced to treat traumatic or burn scars. Although vacuum massage was invented to treat burns and scars, one can find very little literature on the effects of this intervention. Therefore, the aim of this review is to present an overview of the available literature on the physical and physiological effects of vacuum massage on epidermal and dermal skin structures in order to find the underlying working mechanisms that could benefit the healing of burns and scars. The discussion contains translational analysis of the results and provides recommendations for future research on the topic. An extended search for publications was performed using PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Two authors independently identified and checked each study against the inclusion criteria. Nineteen articles were included in the qualitative synthesis. The two most reported physical effects of vacuum massage were improvement of the tissue hardness and the elasticity of the skin. Besides physical effects, a variety of physiological effects are reported in literature, for example, an increased number of fibroblasts and collagen fibres accompanied by an alteration of fibroblast phenotype and collagen orientation. Little information was found on the decrease of pain and itch due to vacuum massage. Although vacuum massage initially had been developed for the treatment of burn scars, this literature review found little evidence for the efficacy of this treatment. Variations in duration, amplitude or frequency of the treatment have a substantial influence on collagen restructuring and reorientation, thus implying possible beneficial influences on the healing potential by mechanotransduction pathways. Vacuum massage may release the mechanical tension associated with scar retraction and thus induce apoptosis of myofibroblasts. Suggestions for future research include upscaling the study design, investigating the molecular pathways and dose dependency, comparing effects in different stages of repair, including evolutive parameters and the use of more objective assessment tools.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 106 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 16 15%
Student > Master 12 11%
Other 10 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 8%
Other 18 17%
Unknown 33 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 5%
Sports and Recreations 5 5%
Engineering 4 4%
Other 15 14%
Unknown 38 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Burns & Trauma
#266
of 304 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#240,781
of 328,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Burns & Trauma
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 304 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,302 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.