A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials on Interventions Adopting Body-Mind-Spirit (BMS) Model on Holistic Well-Being.

IF 3.3 Q1 INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE
Tongtong Li, Xinyue Hu, Iris Chi
{"title":"A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials on Interventions Adopting Body-Mind-Spirit (BMS) Model on Holistic Well-Being.","authors":"Tongtong Li, Xinyue Hu, Iris Chi","doi":"10.1177/2515690X221103303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This systematic review aims to examine existing randomized controlled trials on interventions adopting Body-Mind-Spirit (BMS) model and evaluated the effectiveness of holistic well-being outcomes. Following three key concepts of the BMS model, our review questions included (1) How was BMS defined? (2) What activities were included, and how were they related to BMS dimensions? (3) What were interventionists' backgrounds, and whether they received BMS training? (4) What were holistic outcomes? and (5) What were the effectiveness and qualities of studies?</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Searches were performed using nine databases for the studies published through August 2020. The process follows PRISMA protocol, and the \"risk of bias\" tool from the Cochrane Handbook was utilized to determine the quality of included studies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Across 20 included studies, 18 (90%) presented a BMS definition, but only seven (35%) included all three key concepts of the BMS model. Eight studies (40%) offered detailed descriptions of body, mind, and spirit sections, and 12 (60%) mentioned cultural factors. Only five (25%) specified the body, mind, and spirit activities, and only three (15%) reported the BMS training in detail. Seven studies (35%) showed effectiveness in holistic outcomes. Only three (15%) were considered as high quality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>A unified definition of the BMS model and the guideline to apply the BMS model to design and implement interventions are highly recommended to provide a standard framework for researchers to conduct future studies. The reason for low quality is because the lack of adequate allocation concealment and blindings.</p>","PeriodicalId":15714,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence-based Integrative Medicine","volume":"27 ","pages":"2515690X221103303"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/39/4b/10.1177_2515690X221103303.PMC9168865.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Evidence-based Integrative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/2515690X221103303","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This systematic review aims to examine existing randomized controlled trials on interventions adopting Body-Mind-Spirit (BMS) model and evaluated the effectiveness of holistic well-being outcomes. Following three key concepts of the BMS model, our review questions included (1) How was BMS defined? (2) What activities were included, and how were they related to BMS dimensions? (3) What were interventionists' backgrounds, and whether they received BMS training? (4) What were holistic outcomes? and (5) What were the effectiveness and qualities of studies?

Methods: Searches were performed using nine databases for the studies published through August 2020. The process follows PRISMA protocol, and the "risk of bias" tool from the Cochrane Handbook was utilized to determine the quality of included studies.

Results: Across 20 included studies, 18 (90%) presented a BMS definition, but only seven (35%) included all three key concepts of the BMS model. Eight studies (40%) offered detailed descriptions of body, mind, and spirit sections, and 12 (60%) mentioned cultural factors. Only five (25%) specified the body, mind, and spirit activities, and only three (15%) reported the BMS training in detail. Seven studies (35%) showed effectiveness in holistic outcomes. Only three (15%) were considered as high quality.

Conclusion: A unified definition of the BMS model and the guideline to apply the BMS model to design and implement interventions are highly recommended to provide a standard framework for researchers to conduct future studies. The reason for low quality is because the lack of adequate allocation concealment and blindings.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

对采用 "身-心-灵(BMS)"整体健康模式进行干预的随机对照试验的系统性回顾。
背景:本系统性综述旨在研究现有的采用身-心-灵(BMS)模式的干预措施的随机对照试验,并评估整体健康结果的有效性。根据 BMS 模式的三个关键概念,我们的综述问题包括:(1)如何定义 BMS?(2) 包括哪些活动?(3) 干预人员的背景如何,他们是否接受过 BMS 培训?(4) 整体结果如何? (5) 研究的有效性和质量如何?使用九个数据库对 2020 年 8 月之前发表的研究进行检索。检索过程遵循 PRISMA 协议,并使用 Cochrane 手册中的 "偏倚风险 "工具来确定纳入研究的质量:在 20 项纳入的研究中,18 项(90%)提出了 BMS 的定义,但只有 7 项(35%)包含了 BMS 模型的所有三个关键概念。八项研究(40%)对身体、思想和精神部分进行了详细描述,12 项研究(60%)提到了文化因素。只有五项研究(25%)具体说明了身、心、灵活动,只有三项研究(15%)详细报告了 BMS 培训。七项研究(35%)显示了整体结果的有效性。只有三项(15%)被认为是高质量的研究:强烈建议对 BMS 模式进行统一定义,并制定应用 BMS 模式设计和实施干预措施的指南,以便为研究人员今后开展研究提供标准框架。低质量的原因是缺乏足够的分配隐藏和盲法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Evidence-based Integrative Medicine
Journal of Evidence-based Integrative Medicine INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE-
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
43
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信