Forest Human Service Division, Future Forest Strategy Department, National Institute of Forest Science, Seoul 02455, Korea.
Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University, Seoul 08826, Korea.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Feb 25;19(5):2692. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19052692.
Over the past decade, clinical trials of forest-based interventions have increased, leading to their recognition as preventive medicine. However, little is known about the differences in health effects according to the activity characteristics of interventions. This study aimed to understand the types of activities and their associated health effects to identify differences in health effects between activities. PubMed, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus databases were searched, and methodological quality was assessed using Cochrane ROB2. A total of 32 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) met the eligibility criteria. Health outcomes were collected from 6264 participants aged 6-98 years, and the sample size was 12-585. The Interventions were walking (n = 21), staying (n = 7), exercise (n = 4), indirect exposure (n = 4), and the activity time was between 10 and 240 min. Overall, walking showed consistent positive health effects, and there were differences in effects on anxiety and depression, cognitive function, stress hormone, and inflammation according to the activity. However, most of the included studies had a high risk of bias, and interventions were limited to specific activities, durations, and frequencies. Although a few limitations remain, the findings in this study are of great significance in providing the basis for the design of forest-based interventions.
在过去的十年中，基于森林的干预措施的临床试验有所增加，这使其被认为是预防医学的一种手段。然而，对于干预措施的活动特征对健康影响的差异，人们知之甚少。本研究旨在了解活动的类型及其与健康效应的关联，以确定不同活动之间的健康效应差异。本研究检索了 PubMed、PsycINFO、Web of Science 和 Scopus 数据库，并使用 Cochrane ROB2 评估了方法学质量。共有 32 项随机对照试验（RCT）符合入选标准。从 6-98 岁的 6264 名参与者中收集了健康结果，样本量为 12-585。干预措施包括步行（n=21）、停留（n=7）、运动（n=4）、间接暴露（n=4），活动时间为 10-240 分钟。总的来说，步行表现出一致的积极健康影响，并且根据活动的不同，在焦虑和抑郁、认知功能、应激激素和炎症方面的影响也存在差异。然而，大多数纳入的研究存在高偏倚风险，并且干预措施仅限于特定的活动、持续时间和频率。尽管存在一些局限性，但本研究的结果在为森林干预措施的设计提供基础方面具有重要意义。
