Scholarlink

Background <p>In Japan, with aging population, there is a growing emphasis on community-based integrated care system, focusing on supporting healthy lifestyles and promoting prevention in medicine, nursing care, and welfare. Meanwhile, the U.S. is witnessing the widespread implementation of healthcare incorporating the concept of integrative health (IH), which combines evidence-based complementary approaches with conventional healthcare approaches. In this study, the focus was on aromatherapy and yoga, both of which were expected to have a positive effect on patients as complementary approaches. The purpose of the study was to determine the impact of the complementary approaches on pharmacotherapy.</p> Methods <p>This study was a single-facility, retrospective observational study. This study was conducted from March 3, 2022, to March 31, 2024. The data extraction of the patients was performed at the Maeda Clinic, and the analysis was performed at the collaborating institutions. Participants were enrolled, aged ≥ 20 years, who sought aromatherapy or yoga for 6-month. The primary endpoint was the MRCI-J score, which quantified the effect of variations in prescription drugs dosage form and usage before and after 6 months. The secondary endpoints were age, number of complementary approaches, number of clinic visits, change and rate of change in the number of prescription drugs, number of prescription drugs, and change and rate of change in the MRCI-J score, when grouped according to the increase in the MRCI-J score.</p> Results <p>96 participants met the eligibility criteria. After 6 months, the complementary approaches were performed more frequently in the non-increased MRCI-J score group than in the increased MRCI-J score group (8.0 ± 5.8 vs. 5.3 ± 4.1; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01). The rate of change in the number of prescription drugs was significantly higher in the increased MRCI-J score group than in the non-increased MRCI-J score group (1.5 ± 0.77 vs.0.89 ± 0.18; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.01).</p> Conclusions <p>This study determined patient profiles receiving complementary approaches, and changes in prescription drugs. The frequency of complementary approaches might have affected the changes in prescription.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Evaluation of the efficacy of aromatherapy and complementary yoga on indicators of medication regimen complexity: A retrospective study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年8月19日

查看全文
  • Megumi H. Yahara,
  • Toshiko Sakamoto,
  • Kazuhisa Maeda,
  • Atsushi Kinoshita,
  • Kenji Ikeda

摘要

Background

In Japan, with aging population, there is a growing emphasis on community-based integrated care system, focusing on supporting healthy lifestyles and promoting prevention in medicine, nursing care, and welfare. Meanwhile, the U.S. is witnessing the widespread implementation of healthcare incorporating the concept of integrative health (IH), which combines evidence-based complementary approaches with conventional healthcare approaches. In this study, the focus was on aromatherapy and yoga, both of which were expected to have a positive effect on patients as complementary approaches. The purpose of the study was to determine the impact of the complementary approaches on pharmacotherapy.

Methods

This study was a single-facility, retrospective observational study. This study was conducted from March 3, 2022, to March 31, 2024. The data extraction of the patients was performed at the Maeda Clinic, and the analysis was performed at the collaborating institutions. Participants were enrolled, aged ≥ 20 years, who sought aromatherapy or yoga for 6-month. The primary endpoint was the MRCI-J score, which quantified the effect of variations in prescription drugs dosage form and usage before and after 6 months. The secondary endpoints were age, number of complementary approaches, number of clinic visits, change and rate of change in the number of prescription drugs, number of prescription drugs, and change and rate of change in the MRCI-J score, when grouped according to the increase in the MRCI-J score.

Results

96 participants met the eligibility criteria. After 6 months, the complementary approaches were performed more frequently in the non-increased MRCI-J score group than in the increased MRCI-J score group (8.0 ± 5.8 vs. 5.3 ± 4.1; p < 0.01). The rate of change in the number of prescription drugs was significantly higher in the increased MRCI-J score group than in the non-increased MRCI-J score group (1.5 ± 0.77 vs.0.89 ± 0.18; p < 0.01).

Conclusions

This study determined patient profiles receiving complementary approaches, and changes in prescription drugs. The frequency of complementary approaches might have affected the changes in prescription.