Effects of Kneipp Therapy

Einleitung: Ziel dieser systematischen Übersicht war die Bewertung der verfügbaren Evidenz zur Wirkung der Kneipp-Therapie. Methoden: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane-Library und CAMbase wurden nach relevanten Artikeln, veröffentlicht zwischen 2000 und 2019, durchsucht. Graue Literatur wurde über Google Scholar und andere Tools bezogen. Studien mit jeglicher Art von Studiendesign, die die Effekte der Kneipp-Therapie untersuchten, wurden eingeschlossen. Die Qualitätsbewertung erfolgte mittels EPHPP-QAT. Ergebnisse: 25 Quellen, darunter 14 kontrollierte Studien, wurden eingeschlossen. Gemäß EPHPP-QAT wurden 3 Studien \textquotedblstark\textquotedbl, 13 \textquotedblmoderat\textquotedbl und 9 \textquotedblschwach\textquotedbl bewertet. Neun (64%) der kontrollierten Studien berichteten signifikante Verbesserungen nach Kneipp-Therapie im Gruppenvergleich bei chronisch-venöser Insuffizienz, Hypertonie, leichter Herzinsuffizienz, menopausalen Be-schwerden und Schlafstörungen in verschiedenen Patientenkollektiven sowie verbesserte Immunparameter bei gesunden Probanden. Im Hinblick auf Depression und Angst bei Mammakarzinom-Patientinnen mit klimakterischen Beschwerden, Lebensqualität bei Post-Polio-Syndrom, krankheitsbedingten polyneuropathischen Beschwerden und Inzidenz von Erkältungsepisoden bei Kindern konnten keine signifikanten Gruppenunterschiede festgestellt werden. Elf unkontrollierte Studien berichteten Verbesserungen bei allergischen Symptomen, Dyspepsie, Lebensqualität, Herzratenvariabilität, Infekten, Hypertonie, Wohlbefinden, Schmerz und polyneuropathischen Beschwerden. Diskussion/Schlussfolgerung: Die Kneipp-Therapie scheint bei zahlreichen Beschwerdebildern in verschiedenen Patientenkollektiven positive Effekte zu bewirken. Zukünftige Studien sollten noch stärker auf eine methodisch sorgfältige Studienplanung achten (Kontrollgruppen, Randomisierung, adäquate Fallzahlen, Verblindung), um Verzerrungen entgegenzuwirken

The Psychological and Physical Effects of Forests on Human Health: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

BACKGROUND The aim of this systematic review of systematic reviews was to identify, summarise, and synthesise the available evidence of systematic reviews (SRs) and meta-analyses (MAs) on the preventative and therapeutic psychological and physical effects of forest-based interventions. Methods: Both bibliographic databases and grey literature sources were searched for SRs and MAs published until May 2020. Eight databases were searched for relevant articles: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PsycInfo, CiNii, EBSCO, and Scopus. Grey literature was sourced from Google Scholar and other web-based search tools. SRs and MAs that included randomised controlled (RCT), non-randomised controlled (NRCT), and non-controlled trials (NCT) on health-related effects of forest-based interventions were eligible if they had searched at least two databases. The methodological quality of eligible reviews was assessed by AMSTAR-2. Results: We evaluated 11 systematic reviews covering 131 different primary intervention studies, mostly from Asian countries, three of which included supplementary meta-analyses. The quality assessment resulted in moderate confidence in the results of two reviews, low confidence in six, and critically low confidence in three. The results of the eight moderate and low-rated reviews indicated that forest-based interventions are beneficial to the cardiovascular system, immune system, and mental health (in the areas of stress, depression, anxiety, and negative emotions). Evidence for the effectiveness of forest-based interventions on metabolic parameters in adults, the severity of atopic dermatitis in children and adolescents, and social skills and sociality in healthy primary school children was weak. Discussion/Conclusions: Evidence suggests beneficial therapeutic effects of forest-based interventions on hypertension, stress, and mental-health disorders, such as depression and anxiety. Changes in immunological and inflammatory parameters after forest therapy should be verified in bio-geographically native forests. In the future, more attention should be paid to careful planning, implementation, and reporting of primary studies and to systematic reviews on the effects of forest-based interventions

Validation of the comprehensive ICF core set for low back pain: the perspective of physical therapists

The "Comprehensive ICF Core Set for Low Back Pain (LBP)" is an application of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) and represents the typical spectrum of problems in functioning for patients with LBP. The aim of this study was to validate the Comprehensive ICF Core Set for low back pain from the perspective of physical therapists. Physical therapists experienced in LBP treatment were asked about the patients' problems, patients' resources and aspects of environment treated by physical therapists in a three-round survey using the Delphi technique. Responses were linked to the ICF. Eighty-four physical therapists in 32 countries named 1955 concepts that covered all ICF components. Fourteen ICF categories were not represented in the Comprehensive ICF Core Set for LBP although at least 75% of the participants have rated them as important. Most of them belonged to the ICF component "Body Functions". Twenty-eight concepts were linked to the not-yet-developed ICF component personal factors. Further, 21 issues were not covered by the ICF. The validity of the ICF components "Body Structures", "Activities and Participation" and "Environmental Factors" was largely supported by the physical therapists. However, several body functions were identified which are not covered and need further investigation

Update: Interventions to build resilience and to ameliorate psycho-social effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on children and adolescents – a systematic review protocol

Update of a systematic review with the objective to assess the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions (e.g., counselling, support measures and material, trainings) for children/ adolescents and their families and caregivers to build resilience and to ameliorate psychosocial effects such as stress, child maltreatment and mental health problems, for example anxiety and depressive symptoms caused by the COVID-19 pandemic

Interventions to build resilience and to ameliorate negative psychosocial effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on children and adolescents: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The psychosocial health of children and adolescents has been particularly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Containment measures have restricted social development, education and recreational activities, may have increased family conflicts and, in many cases, led to feelings of loneliness, sleep disturbances, symptoms of anxiety and depression. We conducted a systematic review to identify interventions that seek to ameliorate these detrimental effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and to build resilience in children and adolescents. Literature searches were conducted in the databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, WHO COVID-19 Global literature on coronavirus disease and Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register (up to 30 June 2022). The searches retrieved 9557 records of which we included 13 randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) for evidence synthesis. Included studies predominantly implemented online group sessions for school-aged children with either a psychological component, a physical activity component, or a combination of both. A meta-analysis of seven studies on anxiety and five on depressive symptoms provided evidence for a positive effect of interventions by reducing anxiety (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD) (95% CI): - 0.33 (- 0.59; - 0.06)) and depressive symptoms (SMD (95% CI): - 0.26 (- 0.36; - 0.16)) compared to the control interventions. Studies also showed improvements in positive mental health outcomes, such as resilience (nâ=â2) and mental and psychological wellbeing (nâ=â2). Exploratory subgroup analyses suggested a greater effectiveness of interventions that (i) are of higher frequency and duration, (ii) enable personal interaction (face-to-face or virtually), and (iii) include a physical activity component. Almost all studies were judged to be at high risk of bias and showed considerable heterogeneity. Further research may focus on the contribution of different intervention components or distinct subgroups and settings, and should examine children and adolescents over longer follow-up periods