4.2 Review

Mind-body interventions for vasomotor symptoms in healthy menopausal women and breast cancer survivors. A systematic review

期刊

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/0167482X.2016.1235147

关键词

Hot flashes; mind-body interventions; night sweats; vasomotor symptoms

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mind-body therapies are commonly recommended to treat vasomotor symptoms, such as hot flushes and night sweats (HFNS). The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the available evidence to date for the efficacy of different mind-body therapies to alleviate HFNS in healthy menopausal women and breast cancer survivors. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified using seven electronic search engines, direct searches of specific journals and backwards searches through reference lists of related publications. Outcome measures included HFNS frequency and/or severity or self-reported problem rating at post-treatment. The methodological quality of all studies was systematically assessed using predefined criteria. Twenty-six RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Interventions included yoga (n=5), hypnosis (n=3), mindfulness (n=2), relaxation (n=7), paced breathing (n=4), reflexology (n=1) and cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) (n=4). Findings were consistent for the effectiveness of CBT and relaxation therapies for alleviating troublesome vasomotor symptoms. For the remaining interventions, although some trials indicated beneficial effects (within groups) at post-treatment and/or follow up, between group findings were mixed and overall, methodological differences across studies failed to provide convincing supporting evidence. Collectively, findings suggest that interventions that include breathing and relaxation techniques, as well as CBT, can be beneficial for alleviating vasomotor symptoms. Additional large, methodologically rigorous trials are needed to establish the efficacy of interventions on vasomotor symptoms, examine long-term outcomes and understand how they work.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据