Connor Whole Health, University Hospitals, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.
J Integr Complement Med. 2022 Aug;28(8):618-640. doi: 10.1089/jicm.2021.0413. Epub 2022 Jul 14.
The goal of this systematic review was to evaluate the impact of individualized complementary and integrative health (CIH) interventions on quality-of-life outcomes as collected in CIH outpatient clinics. A systematic review was conducted using PubMed, OVID, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase through December 2020. Inclusion criteria were as follows: individualized CIH treatment, longitudinal effectiveness design, patient-reported outcomes, outpatient CIH clinic setting, participants aged ≥18 years, sample size of ≥25, and English full text. The study was listed in the PROSPERO database (CRD42020159193), and PRISMA guidelines were used. The variables extracted from articles focused on study details/demographics, CIH intervention characteristics, and outcome characteristics. The literature search yielded 3316 records with 264 assessed for full-text review. Of these, 19 studies (including ∼14,002 patients) were specific to quality of life (or well-being) as a main outcome. Most studies included were multidisciplinary studies ( = 12), followed by acupuncture ( = 4), chiropractic ( = 3), and massage or reflexology ( = 1). The short-form group of questionnaires (SF-12, SF-36, SF-8) were the most used quality-of-life/well-being questionnaire, comprising 37% of studies ( = 7), and the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) measures comprised 21% ( = 4). Both questionnaires are normed to U.S. population, allowing for comparison. The average improvement across the comparable SF and PROMIS measures for Physical Health was 6% (range 2%-20%) and for Mental Health was 5% (range 1%-11%), demonstrating clinical significance. Improvements in the observational studies are comparable to improvements reported from randomized controlled trials. Results from this systematic review indicate that CIH therapies largely have positive effects on health-related quality of life and well-being for various patient populations seen in CIH clinical settings. Direct comparisons across studies were limited due to the variability in study design and incomplete reporting in some of the publications. Suggestions for improving the design and reporting for future practice-based research are provided.
本系统评价的目的是评估个体化补充和综合健康(CIH)干预对 CIH 门诊收集的生活质量结果的影响。使用 PubMed、OVID、Cochrane、Web of Science、Scopus 和 Embase 进行了系统评价,检索时间截至 2020 年 12 月。纳入标准如下:个体化 CIH 治疗、纵向有效性设计、患者报告结局、CIH 门诊诊所环境、年龄≥18 岁的参与者、样本量≥25 例以及英文全文。该研究已在 PROSPERO 数据库(CRD42020159193)中列出,并遵循 PRISMA 指南。从文章中提取的变量侧重于研究细节/人口统计学、CIH 干预特征和结局特征。文献检索产生了 3316 条记录,其中 264 条记录进行了全文评估。在这些记录中,19 项研究(包括约 14002 名患者)专门针对生活质量(或幸福感)作为主要结局。大多数纳入的研究是多学科研究(n=12),其次是针灸(n=4)、整脊(n=3)和按摩或反射疗法(n=1)。短表单问卷(SF-12、SF-36、SF-8)是使用最多的生活质量/幸福感问卷,占研究的 37%(n=7),而患者报告的结局测量信息系统(PROMIS)测量占 21%(n=4)。这两个问卷都基于美国人群进行标准化,允许进行比较。在可比的 SF 和 PROMIS 身体健康测量中,平均改善率为 6%(范围为 2%-20%),心理健康为 5%(范围为 1%-11%),表明具有临床意义。观察性研究中的改善与随机对照试验报告的改善相当。本系统评价的结果表明,CIH 疗法对 CIH 临床环境中各种患者群体的健康相关生活质量和幸福感产生了积极影响。由于研究设计的变异性和部分出版物报告不完整,因此无法进行跨研究的直接比较。为提高未来基于实践的研究的设计和报告提供了建议。