Anthroposophical medicine in oncology

Schlaeppi, Marc; Büssing, Arndt; Müller-Hübenthal, Boris; Heusser, Peter

doi:10.1007/s00761-010-1891-x

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While literature reviews are available for multimodal application and other treatment modalities of AM (47)(48)(49)(50)(51), a systematic review on EAAM has not yet been published and is necessary for establishing the safety and evaluating the effectiveness of the method.…”

Section: State Of Research On External Applications From Anthroposoph...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Touching body, soul, and spirit? Understanding external applications from integrative medicine: A mixed methods systematic review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionExternal applications from anthroposophic medicine (EAAM) are touch-based applications such as rhythmical massages, embrocations, and compresses that serve as components of complementary treatment concepts for various diseases. The aim of this review is to gain an understanding of typical indications and outcomes and to systematically assess the effectiveness and safety of EAAM.Materials and methodsMedline/PubMed, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, Embase, and PsycINFO were searched through May 2021 and supplemented by searches in specialized databases and personal requests to experts in the field. Studies and case reports on EAAM in patients, as well as healthy individuals, were included in the qualitative synthesis. Outcome parameters depending on each study were grouped as effect themes and assigned to study clusters using Thematic Analysis for a thematic overview of effect patterns.ResultsFour RCTs, 7 cohort studies, 1 mixed-methods, 1 retrospective, 4 qualitative studies, 3 case series, and 25 case reports on EAAM were identified. The analysis indicated various effects of EAAM on physiological as well as psychological health indicators and patterns of effect development. Study quality was found to be high for only 2 studies, and moderate for 1 study, and all remaining 45 studies showed a moderate or high risk of bias or were not ratable with used rating tools.ConclusionThe included studies present a wide range of potential indications for EAAM, while showing methodological drawbacks. To determine whether EAAM can be considered an effective treatment option, clinical studies exploring the effect of different EAAM modalities on defined patient groups are recommended for the future.Systematic review registration[https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=214030], identifier [CRD42020214030].

show abstract