Mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions for people with spinal cord injury: a scoping review

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Mengqi Li, Wing Yiu Lo, Yule Hu, Shanshan Wang, Tsz-Ching Sun, Worku Animaw Temesgen, Mengting He, Yan Li
{"title":"Mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions for people with spinal cord injury: a scoping review","authors":"Mengqi Li, Wing Yiu Lo, Yule Hu, Shanshan Wang, Tsz-Ching Sun, Worku Animaw Temesgen, Mengting He, Yan Li","doi":"10.1038/s41393-025-01068-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scoping review. To synthesize the effects of mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions (MABIs) on health-related outcomes of individuals with spinal cord injury. The included studies were conducted across four countries: The United States, Iran, China, and The United Kingdom. This review followed the Arksey and O’Malley framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. Seven databases were searched until November 2024 to identify studies published in English-language that evaluated MABIs’ effects on health-related outcomes in people with spinal cord injury. Literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted by two reviewers independently. A narrative data synthesis was conducted. Of 2389 records, nine studies were included with designs of randomized controlled trials (n = 4), quasi-experimental studies (n = 3), and case studies (n = 2). Acceptance commitment therapy (n = 4) and mindfulness-based interventions (n = 5) were employed. MABIs demonstrated significant improvements in psychological health outcomes (depression, n = 3; anxiety, n = 3; stress, n = 2) with medium-to-large effect sizes ( $${{{{\\rm{\\eta }}}}}_{{{{\\rm{p}}}}}^{2}=0.112-0.223$$ ) and other health-related outcomes (chronic pain, n = 1; functional independence, n = 1; engagement in meaningful activities, n = 1; and quality of life, n = 1). Participants found the MABIs to be acceptable and satisfactory. Study quality varied from weak (n = 6) to strong (n = 2). The findings generally support the acceptability and effectiveness of MABIs for improving the overall well-being of individuals with SCI. Future research directions regarding designing MABIs and exploring effectiveness mechanisms were recommended for maximizing its benefits.","PeriodicalId":21976,"journal":{"name":"Spinal cord","volume":"63 3","pages":"159-170"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spinal cord","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41393-025-01068-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Scoping review. To synthesize the effects of mindfulness- and acceptance-based interventions (MABIs) on health-related outcomes of individuals with spinal cord injury. The included studies were conducted across four countries: The United States, Iran, China, and The United Kingdom. This review followed the Arksey and O’Malley framework and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. Seven databases were searched until November 2024 to identify studies published in English-language that evaluated MABIs’ effects on health-related outcomes in people with spinal cord injury. Literature screening, data extraction, and quality assessment were conducted by two reviewers independently. A narrative data synthesis was conducted. Of 2389 records, nine studies were included with designs of randomized controlled trials (n = 4), quasi-experimental studies (n = 3), and case studies (n = 2). Acceptance commitment therapy (n = 4) and mindfulness-based interventions (n = 5) were employed. MABIs demonstrated significant improvements in psychological health outcomes (depression, n = 3; anxiety, n = 3; stress, n = 2) with medium-to-large effect sizes ( $${{{{\rm{\eta }}}}}_{{{{\rm{p}}}}}^{2}=0.112-0.223$$ ) and other health-related outcomes (chronic pain, n = 1; functional independence, n = 1; engagement in meaningful activities, n = 1; and quality of life, n = 1). Participants found the MABIs to be acceptable and satisfactory. Study quality varied from weak (n = 6) to strong (n = 2). The findings generally support the acceptability and effectiveness of MABIs for improving the overall well-being of individuals with SCI. Future research directions regarding designing MABIs and exploring effectiveness mechanisms were recommended for maximizing its benefits.

Abstract Image

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Spinal cord
Spinal cord 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
9.10%
发文量
142
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Spinal Cord is a specialised, international journal that has been publishing spinal cord related manuscripts since 1963. It appears monthly, online and in print, and accepts contributions on spinal cord anatomy, physiology, management of injury and disease, and the quality of life and life circumstances of people with a spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord is multi-disciplinary and publishes contributions across the entire spectrum of research ranging from basic science to applied clinical research. It focuses on high quality original research, systematic reviews and narrative reviews. Spinal Cord''s sister journal Spinal Cord Series and Cases: Clinical Management in Spinal Cord Disorders publishes high quality case reports, small case series, pilot and retrospective studies perspectives, Pulse survey articles, Point-couterpoint articles, correspondences and book reviews. It specialises in material that addresses all aspects of life for persons with spinal cord injuries or disorders. For more information, please see the aims and scope of Spinal Cord Series and Cases.
×
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