Abstract
Background. In the last decades, several hospitals have adopted this concept of integrative medicine for the treatment of chronic and acute states of illnesses in in-patient treatment. The aim of this paper was to summarize the current evidence for a possible effectiveness of integrative on-patient treatment in patients' quality of life by means of a meta-analysis. Material and Methods. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, PsycInfo, PsycLit CCMED, and CAMbase were screened to find articles. We also screened publisher databases to find relevant information. Articles were included if patients were treated in a hospital. To guarantee comparability SF-36 was the predefined outcome measure for patients' quality of life. Data of pre/posteffects on the mental and physical scores of the SF-36 were extracted and effect sizes were calculated and entered into a random effect meta-analysis. Results. Eight articles published between 2003 and 2010 were included in the final meta-analysis. Random effect meta-analysis of the eight studies revealed an overall effect size of 0.37 (95% CI: [0.28; 0.45]) in the physical score and 0.38 (95% CI: [0.30; 0.45]) in the mental score of the SF-36. I 2 statistics indicate a high heterogeneity in the effects in both the physical and mental scores of the SF-36 (I 2 = 91.8%, P < 0.001, resp.; I 2 = 86.7%, P < 0.001). Discussion. This meta-analysis might help to rediscover the importance of integrative in-patient treatment for patients, physicians, and stakeholders.
Highlights
Integrative medicine according to the definition of the consortium of the Academic Health Centers for integrative medicine is “the practice of medicine that reaffirms the importance of the relationship between practitioner and patient, focuses on the whole person, is informed by evidence, and makes use of all appropriate therapeutic approaches, healthcare professionals, and disciplines to achieve optimal health and healing” [1]
Several hospitals have adopted this concept of integrative medicine for the treatment of chronic and acute states of illnesses in in-patient treatment
I2 statistics indicate a high heterogeneity in the effects in both the physical and mental scores of the SF-36 (I2 = 91.8%, P < 0.001, resp.; I2 = 86.7%, P < 0.001)
Summary
Integrative medicine according to the definition of the consortium of the Academic Health Centers for integrative medicine is “the practice of medicine that reaffirms the importance of the relationship between practitioner and patient, focuses on the whole person, is informed by evidence, and makes use of all appropriate therapeutic approaches, healthcare professionals, and disciplines to achieve optimal health and healing” [1] It may combine the treatment of conventional medicine and complementary alternative medicine (CAM) and assists the patient’s own capacities to recover from illness. Several hospitals have adopted this concept of integrative medicine for the treatment of chronic and acute states of illnesses in in-patient treatment [2, 3] This includes hospitals with a special focus on mind body therapies, naturopathy, anthroposophical medicine, homeopathy or traditional Chinese medicine. This meta-analysis might help to rediscover the importance of integrative in-patient treatment for patients, physicians, and stakeholders
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
