35 research outputs found

    The Therapy Garden Nacadia®:The interplay between evidence-based health design in landscape architecture, nature-based therapy and the individual

    Get PDF

    "Everything just seems much more right in nature":how veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder experience nature-based activities in a forest therapy garden

    Get PDF
    Available evidence shows that an increasing number of soldiers are seeking help for post-traumatic stress disorder. The post-traumatic stress disorder condition has big emotional and psychological consequences for the individual, his/her family and the society. Little research has been done to explore the impact of nature-based therapy for veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder although there is a growing amount of evidence pointing towards positive outcome. This qualitative study aims to achieve a deeper understanding of this relationship from the veteran’s perspective. Eight Danish veterans participated in a 10-week nature-based therapy. Qualitative interviews were conducted and analysed using the interpretative phenomenological method. The results indicated that the veterans have achieved tools to use in stressful situations and experienced an improvement in their post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms

    A Diagnostic Post-Occupancy Evaluation of the Nacadia® Therapy Garden

    Get PDF
    The design of the Nacadia® therapy garden is based on a model for evidence-based health design in landscape architecture (EBHDL). One element of the model is a diagnostic post-occupancy evaluation (DPOE), which has not previously been fully developed. The present study develops a generic DPOE for therapy gardens, with a focus on studying the effects of the design on patients’ health outcomes. This is done in order to identify successes and failures in the design. By means of a triangulation approach, the DPOE employs a mixture of methods, and data is interpreted corroborating. The aim of the present study is to apply the DPOE to the Nacadia® therapy garden. The results of the DPOE suggest that the design of the Nacadia® therapy garden fulfills its stated aims and objectives. The overall environment of the Nacadia ® therapy garden was experienced as protective and safe, and successfully incorporated the various elements of the nature-based therapy programme. The participants encountered meaningful spaces and activities which suited their current physical and mental capabilities, and the health outcome measured by EQ-VAS (self-estimated general health) indicated a significant increase. Some design failures were identified, of which visual exposure was the most noteworthy. The DPOE model presented appears to be efficient but would nonetheless profit from being validated by other cases

    A long-term follow-up of the efficacy of nature-based therapy for adults suffering from stress-related illnesses on levels of healthcare consumption and sick-leave absence: A randomized controlled trial

    Get PDF
    Stress-related illnesses are a growing health problem in the Western world; which also has economic significance for society. As a consequence; there is a growing demand for effective treatments. The study investigates the long-term efficacy of the Nacadia® nature-based therapy (NNBT) by comparing it to the efficacy of a validated cognitive behavioral therapy, called STreSS. The study is designed as a randomized controlled trial in which 84 participants are randomly allocated between the treatments. Long-term efficacy is investigated through data extracts from the national database of Statistics Denmark on the sick leave and the health-care consumption. The results show that both the NNBT and the STreSS lead to a significant decrease in number of contacts with a general practitioner in the period from twelve months prior to treatment to twelve months after treatment; and, a significant decrease in long-term sick leave from the month prior to treatment to twelve months after treatment. The positive long-term effects provide validation for the NNBT as an efficient treatment of stress-related illnesses

    Breathing Exercises for Patients with Asthma in Specialist Care:A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial

    Get PDF
    RATIONALE: Moderate to severe asthma is associated with impaired asthma control and quality of life (QoL) despite access to specialist care and modern pharmacotherapy. Breathing exercises (BrEX) improve QoL in incompletely controlled mild asthma, but impact in moderate to severe asthma is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effectiveness of BrEX as adjuvant treatment on QoL in patients with uncontrolled moderate to severe asthma. METHODS: Adult patients with incompletely controlled asthma attending respiratory specialist clinics were randomized to usual specialist care (UC) or UC and BrEX (UC + BrEX) with three individual physiotherapist-delivered sessions and home exercises. Primary outcome was asthma-related QoL (Mini-Asthma Quality of Life Questionnaire [Mini-AQLQ]) at 6 months on the basis of intention-to-treat analysis. Secondary outcomes: Mini-AQLQ at 12 months, lung function, 6-minute-walk test, physical activity level, Nijmegen Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and adverse events. Repeated-measures mixed-effects models were used to analyze data. Poisson regression models were used to analyze adverse event incidence rate ratio. RESULTS: A total of 193 participants were allocated to UC + BrEX (n = 94) or UC (n = 99). UC + BrEX was superior in the primary outcome (adjusted mean change difference, 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07 to 0.62). Superiority in Mini-AQLQ was sustained at 12 months (0.38; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.65). A minor improvement in Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale depression score at 6 months favoring UC + BrEX (−0.90; 95% CI, −1.67 to −0.14) was observed. Asthma-related adverse events occurred similarly in UC + BrEX and UC participants: 14.9% versus 18.1% (P = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: BrEX as add-on to usual care improve asthma-related QoL in incompletely controlled asthma regardless of severity and with no evidence of harm. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 03127059)
    corecore