Efficacy of basic body awareness therapy on functional outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE

This study examined the efficacy of basis body awareness therapy (BBAT) on functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) in patients with mental health problems and long-lasting conditions including musculoskeletal disorders, chronic and psychosomatic pain, and neurological conditions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro from inception to April 1st, 2022. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to explore the efficacy of BBAT versus non-active and active control conditions.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs (n BBAT = 307, n controls = 428) were included. There was no evidence for reductions in anxiety (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -3.30 to 0.46, p = 0.14), depression (SMD = -0.82, 95% CI = -1.85 to 0.21, p = 0.12), and no improvements in global assessment of functioning for functioning (GAF-F) (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI = -0.03 to 1.19, p = 0.06) or for symptoms (GAF-S) (SMD = 0.76, 95% CI = -0.44 to 1.96, p = 0.21) in BBAT versus non-active control conditions. BBAT reduced anxiety significantly more than active interventions (SMD = -0.84, 95% CI = -1.17 to -0.51, p < 0.001). No significant differences between BBAT and active control conditions were found for reduction in depression (SMD = -1.16, 95% CI = -2.74 to 0.41, p = 0.15) or in self-reported pain (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI = -0.25 to 0.40, p = 0.65). Active control conditions were superior in improving QoL (SMD = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.17, p < 0.001), GAF-F (SMD = 1.58, 95% CI = 0.29 to 2.86, p = 0.016) and GAF-S (SMD = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.53, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Physiotherapists should be cautious in adopting BBAT, noting there is no high-quality evidence to support its' use to improve functionality and QoL in patients with mental health problems and/or long-lasting conditions.