Mind-Body Medicine and Immune System Outcomes: A Systematic Review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Wahbeh H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3516431 | biostudies-literature | 2009
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Mind-Body Medicine and Immune System Outcomes: A Systematic Review.
Wahbeh Helané H Haywood Ashley A Kaufman Karen K Zwickey Heather H
The open complementary medicine journal 20090101
This study is a systematic review of mind-body interventions that used immune outcomes in order to: 1) characterize mind-body medicine studies that assessed immune outcomes, 2) evaluate the quality of mind-body medicine studies measuring immune system effects, and 3) systematically evaluate the evidence for mind-body interventions effect on immune system outcomes using existing formal tools. 111 studies with 4,777 subjects were reviewed. The three largest intervention type categories were Relaxa ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7486127 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The tendency to attend to and avoid cues to pathogens varies across individuals and contexts. Researchers have proposed that this variation is partially driven by immunological vulnerability to infection, though support for this hypothesis is equivocal. One key piece of evidence (Miller & Maner, 2011) shows that participants who have recently been ill-and hence may have a reduced ability to combat subsequent infection-allocate more attention to faces with infectious-disease cues than do participants who have not recently been ill. The current article describes a direct replication of this study using a sample of 402 individuals from the University of Michigan, the University of Glasgow, and Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam-more than 4 times the sample size of the original study. No effect of illness recency on attentional bias for disfigured faces emerged. Though it did not support the original finding, this replication provides suggestions for future research on the psychological underpinnings of pathogen avoidance.
| S-EPMC7675771 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Psychological and health-restorative benefits of mind-body therapies have been investigated, but their impact on the immune system remain less defined.To conduct the first comprehensive review of available controlled trial evidence to evaluate the effects of mind-body therapies on the immune system, focusing on markers of inflammation and anti-viral related immune responses.Data sources included MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and PsycINFO through September 1, 2013. Randomized controlled trials published in English evaluating at least four weeks of Tai Chi, Qi Gong, meditation, or Yoga that reported immune outcome measures were selected. Studies were synthesized separately by inflammatory (n?=?18), anti-viral related immunity (n?=?7), and enumerative (n?=?14) outcomes measures. We performed random-effects meta-analyses using standardized mean difference when appropriate.Thirty-four studies published in 39 articles (total 2, 219 participants) met inclusion criteria. For inflammatory measures, after 7 to 16 weeks of mind-body intervention, there was a moderate effect on reduction of C-reactive protein (effect size [ES], 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04 to 1.12), a small but not statistically significant reduction of interleukin-6 (ES, 0.35; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.75), and negligible effect on tumor necrosis factor-? (ES, 0.21; 95% CI, -0.15 to 0.58). For anti-viral related immune and enumerative measures, there were negligible effects on CD4 counts (ES, 0.15; 95% CI, -0.04 to 0.34) and natural killer cell counts (ES, 0.12, 95% CI -0.21 to 0.45). Some evidence indicated mind-body therapies increase immune responses to vaccination.Mind-body therapies reduce markers of inflammation and influence virus-specific immune responses to vaccination despite minimal evidence suggesting effects on resting anti-viral or enumerative measures. These immunomodulatory effects, albeit incomplete, warrant further methodologically rigorous studies to determine the clinical implications of these findings for inflammatory and infectious disease outcomes.
| S-EPMC4079606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The mind-body therapies of traditional Chinese medicine include several intervention types and combine physical poses with conscious relaxation and breathing techniques. The purpose of this Evidence Map is to describe these different interventions and report related health outcomes. Methods: This evidence map is based on the 3iE Evidence Gap Map methodology. We searched seven electronic databases (BVS, PUBMED, EMBASE, PEDro, ScienceDirect, Web of Sciences, and PschyInfo) from inception to November 2019 and included systematic reviews only. Systematic reviews were analyzed based on AMSTAR 2. We used Tableau to graphically display quality assessment, the number of reviews, outcomes, and effects. Results: The map is based on 116 systematic reviews and 44 meta-analyses. Most of the reviews were published in the last 5 years. The most researched interventions were Tai Chi and Qi Gong. The reviews presented the following quality assessment: 80 high, 43 moderate, 23 low, and 14 critically low. Every 680 distinct outcome effect was classified: 421 as potential positive; 237 as positive; 21 as inconclusive/mixed; one potential negative and none no effect. Positive effects were related to chronic diseases; mental indicators and disorders; vitality, well-being, and quality of life. Potential positive effects were related to balance, mobility, Parkinson's disease, hypertension, joint pain, cognitive performance, and sleep quality. Inconclusive/mixed-effects justify further research, especially in the following areas: Acupressure as Shiatsu and Tuiná for nausea and vomiting; Tai Chi and Qi Gong for acute diseases, prevention of stroke, stroke risk factors, and schizophrenia. Conclusions: The mind-body therapies from traditional Chinese medicine have been applied in different areas and this Evidence Map provides a visualization of valuable information for patients, professionals, and policymakers, to promote evidence-based complementary therapies.
| S-EPMC8722380 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study Objectives. To evaluate the effect of mind-body interventions (MBI) on sleep. Methods. We reviewed randomized controlled MBI trials on adults (through 2013) with at least one sleep outcome measure. We searched eleven electronic databases and excluded studies on interventions not considering mind-body medicine. Studies were categorized by type of MBI, whether sleep was primary or secondary outcome measure and outcome type. Results. 1323 abstracts were screened, and 112 papers were included. Overall, 67 (60%) of studies reported a beneficial effect on at least one sleep outcome measure. Of the most common interventions, 13/23 studies using meditation, 21/30 using movement MBI, and 14/25 using relaxation reported at least some improvements in sleep. There were clear risks of bias for many studies reviewed, especially when sleep was not the main focus. Conclusions. MBI should be considered as a treatment option for patients with sleep disturbance. The benefit of MBI needs to be better documented with objective outcomes as well as the mechanism of benefit elucidated. There is some evidence that MBI have a positive benefit on sleep quality. Since sleep has a direct impact on many other health outcomes, future MBI trials should consider including sleep outcome measurements.
| S-EPMC4487927 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:Mind-body therapies (MBTs) are emerging as potential tools for addressing the opioid crisis. Knowing whether mind-body therapies may benefit patients treated with opioids for acute, procedural, and chronic pain conditions may be useful for prescribers, payers, policy makers, and patients. Objective:To evaluate the association of MBTs with pain and opioid dose reduction in a diverse adult population with clinical pain. Data Sources:For this systematic review and meta-analysis, the MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for English-language randomized clinical trials and systematic reviews from date of inception to March 2018. Search logic included (pain OR analgesia OR opioids) AND mind-body therapies. The gray literature, ClinicalTrials.gov, and relevant bibliographies were also searched. Study Selection:Randomized clinical trials that evaluated the use of MBTs for symptom management in adults also prescribed opioids for clinical pain. Data Extraction and Synthesis:Independent reviewers screened citations, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted using standardized mean differences in pain and opioid dose to obtain aggregate estimates of effect size with 95% CIs. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was pain intensity. The secondary outcomes were opioid dose, opioid misuse, opioid craving, disability, or function. Results:Of 4212 citations reviewed, 60 reports with 6404 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, MBTs were associated with pain reduction (Cohen d?=?-0.51; 95% CI, -0.76 to -0.26) and reduced opioid dose (Cohen d?=?-0.26; 95% CI, -0.44 to -0.08). Studies tested meditation (n?=?5), hypnosis (n?=?25), relaxation (n?=?14), guided imagery (n?=?7), therapeutic suggestion (n?=?6), and cognitive behavioral therapy (n?=?7) interventions. Moderate to large effect size improvements in pain outcomes were found for meditation (Cohen d?=?-0.70), hypnosis (Cohen d?=?-0.54), suggestion (Cohen d?=?-0.68), and cognitive behavioral therapy (Cohen d?=?-0.43) but not for other MBTs. Although most meditation (n?=?4 [80%]), cognitive-behavioral therapy (n?=?4 [57%]), and hypnosis (n?=?12 [63%]) studies found improved opioid-related outcomes, fewer studies of suggestion, guided imagery, and relaxation reported such improvements. Most MBT studies used active or placebo controls and were judged to be at low risk of bias. Conclusions and Relevance:The findings suggest that MBTs are associated with moderate improvements in pain and small reductions in opioid dose and may be associated with therapeutic benefits for opioid-related problems, such as opioid craving and misuse. Future studies should carefully quantify opioid dosing variables to determine the association of mind-body therapies with opioid-related outcomes.
| S-EPMC6830441 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveFear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a common existential concern and source of distress among adults with a cancer history. Multiple randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined mind-body approaches to mitigating FCR. We summarized characteristics of these trials and calculated their pooled effects on decreasing FCR.MethodsSix electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to May 2017, using a strategy that included multiple terms for RCTs, cancer, mind-body medicine, and FCR. Data extraction and reporting followed Cochrane and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Pooled effect sizes on self-report measures of FCR were computed by using random-effects models.ResultsNineteen RCTs (pooled N = 2806) were included. Most studies (53%) were published since 2015 and targeted a single cancer type (84%; mostly breast). Intervention sessions (median = 6, mode = 4) tended to last 120 minutes and occur across 1.5 months. Delivery was predominantly in-person (63%) to either groups (42%) or individuals (42%). Most interventions incorporated multiple mind-body components (53%), commonly cognitive-behavioral skills (58%), or meditative practices (53%). Small-to-medium pooled effect sizes were observed postintervention (Hedges' g = -0.36, 95% CI = -0.49, -0.23, P < .001) and at follow-up assessments (median = 8 months, P < .001). Potential modifiers (control group design, group/individual delivery, use of cognitive-behavioral or mindfulness skills, number of mind-body components, cancer treatment status, and number of sessions) did not reach statistical significance.ConclusionsMind-body interventions are efficacious for reducing FCR, with small-to-medium effect sizes that persist after intervention delivery ends. Recommendations include testing effects among survivors of various cancers and exploring the optimal integration of mind-body practices for managing fundamental uncertainties and fears during cancer survivorship.
| S-EPMC6488231 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceClaims that spinal manipulative therapy (SMT) can improve immune function have increased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic and may have contributed to the rapid spread of both accurate and inaccurate information (referred to as an infodemic by the World Health Organization).ObjectiveTo identify, appraise, and synthesize the scientific literature on the efficacy and effectiveness of SMT in preventing the development of infectious disease or improving disease-specific outcomes in patients with infectious disease and to examine the association between SMT and selected immunological, endocrine, and other physiological biomarkers.Evidence reviewA literature search of MEDLINE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, the Index to Chiropractic Literature, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase was conducted from inception to April 15, 2020. Randomized clinical trials and cohort studies were included. Eligible studies were critically appraised, and evidence with high and acceptable quality was synthesized using the Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis guideline.FindingsA total of 2593 records were retrieved; after exclusions, 50 full-text articles were screened, and 16 articles reporting the findings of 13 studies comprising 795 participants were critically appraised. The literature search found no clinical studies that investigated the efficacy or effectiveness of SMT in preventing the development of infectious disease or improving disease-specific outcomes among patients with infectious disease. Eight articles reporting the results of 6 high- and acceptable-quality RCTs comprising 529 participants investigated the effect of SMT on biomarkers. Spinal manipulative therapy was not associated with changes in lymphocyte levels or physiological markers among patients with low back pain or participants who were asymptomatic compared with sham manipulation, a lecture series, and venipuncture control groups. Spinal manipulative therapy was associated with short-term changes in selected immunological biomarkers among asymptomatic participants compared with sham manipulation, a lecture series, and venipuncture control groups.Conclusions and relevanceIn this systematic review of 13 studies, no clinical evidence was found to support or refute claims that SMT was efficacious or effective in changing immune system outcomes. Although there were limited preliminary data from basic scientific studies suggesting that SMT may be associated with short-term changes in immunological and endocrine biomarkers, the clinical relevance of these findings is unknown. Given the lack of evidence that SMT is associated with the prevention of infectious diseases or improvements in immune function, further studies should be completed before claims of efficacy or effectiveness are made.
| S-EPMC8044731 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess whether mind-body therapies are effective for relieving cancer-related pain in adults, since at least one-third of adults with cancer are affected by moderate or severe pain.MethodsWe searched for all randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials that included adults (≥18 years) with cancer-related pain who were treated with mind-body therapies (mindfulness, hypnosis, yoga, guided imagery, and progressive muscle relaxation) in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Science Citation Index, Web of Science, trials registers, and reference lists. The primary outcome was pain intensity. We calculated the standardized mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and assessed the risk of bias.ResultsWe identified 40 primary studies involving a total of 3569 participants. The meta-analysis included 24 studies (2404 participants) and showed a significant effect of -0.39 (95% CI -0.62 to -0.16) with considerable heterogeneity (I2 = 86.3%, p < 0.001). After we excluded four "outlier" studies in sensitivity analyses, the effect size remained significant but weaker. There was a high risk of bias in all studies, for example, performance bias due to lack of participant blinding. Patients in multiple settings were included but many studies were of low quality.ConclusionsMind-body therapies may be effective in improving cancer pain, but the quality of the evidence is low. There is a need for further high-quality clinical trials.
| S-EPMC9291932 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: This study aimed to systematically evaluate the effects of mind–body exercise on global cognitive function, depression, sleep disorders, fatigue level, and quality of life (QOL) in a Parkinson’s disease (PD) population. Methods: Total six English and Chinese databases were searched for articles published up to May 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating mind–body excises on non-motor symptoms of PD were included. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the methodological quality, and we defined high-quality studies as having a low risk of bias in four or more domains. Global cognitive function was considered the primary outcome and was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). The secondary outcomes included QOL, fatigue, depression, and sleep quality, which were measured using the Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire (PDQ-39), 16-item Parkinson’s Disease Fatigue Scale (PFS-16), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and revised Parkinson’s Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS-2), respectively. Subgroup analyses were conducted for global cognitive function and QOL to assess the optimal treatment measure across the various mind–body exercises. Results: Fourteen RCTs with 404 patients were finally included in the meta-analysis. Eight (57.14%) studies were of high quality. The pooled results showed that mind–body exercises generally had a significant advantage over the control intervention in improving global cognitive function (MD = 1.68; P = 0.0008). The dose subgroup analysis revealed that the low dose (60–120 min per week) and moderate dose (120–200 min per week) significantly increased MoCA scores compared with the control group (MD = 2.11, P = 0.01; MD = 1.27, P = 0.02, respectively). The duration subgroup analysis indicated a significant difference in the effect of the duration (6–10 and >15 weeks) on increasing MoCA scores compared with the control group (MD = 3.74, P < 0.00001; MD = 1.45, P = 0.01, respectively). Conclusion: Mind–body exercise may improve global cognitive function, sleep quality, and QOL in the PD population. In addition, low to moderate doses and appropriate durations significantly improved global cognitive function. Clinical Trial Registration: [www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [CRD42021275522].
| S-EPMC9549381 | biostudies-literature