Proceedings from a National Summit on Workplace Mental Health and Well-Being: A Focus on the Graduate Academic Environment.

OBJECTIVE: To spotlight the challenges, gaps, and opportunities to improve workforce mental health and well-being in higher education institutions (HEIs). METHODS: We convened a full-day summit of subject matter experts from academia, business, government, and practice to share research and best practices on workplace mental health. RESULTS: Highlights from the summit are presented in this paper covering the importance of leadership and culture; the mental health costs associated with being a Black STEM scholar; the role of the environment; case studies of three university mental health and well-being programs; and the future of work. CONCLUSIONS: Establishing a culture of caring requires leadership commitment; strategic planning; accountability and shared responsibility; and measurement and evaluation. HEI leaders are called to lead by example; foster community partnerships; adopt a Total Worker Health framework; and regularly evaluate progress.

Comparing Data Collected on Amazon's Mechanical Turk to National Surveys.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we examined the impact of a range of methods to improve data quality on the demographic and health status representativeness of Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) samples. METHODS: We developed and field-tested a general survey of health on MTurk in 2017 among 5755 participants and 2021 among 6752 participants. We collected information on participant demographic characteristics and health status and implemented different quality checks in 2017 and 2021. RESULTS: Adding data quality checks generally improves the representativeness of the final MTurk sample, but there are persistent differences in mental health and pain conditions, age, education, and income between the MTurk population and the broader US population. CONCLUSION: We conclude that data quality checks improve the data quality and representativeness.

Sleep Management in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): A Systematic Review.

Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a condition that can emerge after exposure to a traumatic event. It involves several symptoms, including distressing memories or dreams and/or dissociative reactions; psychological distress at exposure to trauma cues; physiologic reactions to cues; avoidance of stimuli associated with the event; negative alterations in cognitions and mood associated with the trauma; and alterations in arousal and reactivity, including sleep disturbance. The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesize the evidence from randomized controlled trials on the effects that interventions for adults with PTSD have on sleep outcomes. The authors searched research databases and bibliographies of existing systematic reviews to identify pertinent trials published in English; literature was identified by the searches using predetermined eligibility criteria. The primary outcome domain included sleep quality, insomnia, and nightmares. Secondary outcomes were PTSD symptoms and adverse events. Risk of bias and the quality of evidence were assessed for each outcome. The identified interventions addressed pharmacological, psychological, behavioral, complementary, and integrative medicine treatments aimed at improving sleep or lessening other PTSD symptoms. Interventions in general showed an effect on sleep. Interventions explicitly targeting sleep-particularly psychotherapy targeting sleep-showed larger effects on sleep than did interventions not targeting sleep. Heterogeneity was considerable, but sleep effect estimates were not systematically affected by trauma type, setting, or modality. Comparative effectiveness studies are needed to support the findings.

Sleep management in posttraumatic stress disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) can lead to many negative secondary outcomes for patients, including sleep disturbances. The objective of this meta-analysis is (1) to evaluate the effect of interventions for adults with PTSD on sleep outcomes, PTSD outcomes, and adverse events, and (2) to evaluate the differential effectiveness of interventions aiming to improve sleep compared to those that do not. METHODS: Nine databases were searched for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in PTSD from January 1980 to October 2019. Two independent reviewers screened 7176 records, assessed 2139 full-text articles, and included 89 studies in 155 publications for this review. Sleep, PTSD, and adverse event outcomes were abstracted and meta-analyses were performed using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random effects. RESULTS: Interventions improved sleep outcomes (standardized mean difference [SMD] -0.56; confidence interval [CI] -0.75 to -0.37; 49 RCTs) and PTSD symptoms (SMD -0.48; CI -0.67 to -0.29; 44 RCTs) across studies. Adverse events were not related to interventions overall (RR 1.17; CI 0.91 to 1.49; 15 RCTs). Interventions targeting sleep improved sleep outcomes more than interventions that did not target sleep (p = 0.03). Improvement in PTSD symptoms did not differ between intervention types. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions for patients with PTSD significantly improve sleep outcomes, especially interventions that specifically target sleep. Treatments for adults with PTSD directed towards sleep improvement may benefit patients who suffer from both ailments.

Defining Access Management in Health Care Delivery Organizations.

Managing patient access to care in health care delivery organizations is instrumental in shaping patient experiences. We convened an inclusive stakeholder panel, informed by evidence, to understand the dimensions and establish definitions of access and access management. The literature varies in access definitions, but the temporal measure "time to third next available appointment" was consistently used as an indicator of access. Panel deliberations highlighted the importance of patient-centeredness and resulted in comprehensive definitions for access management, optimal access management, and optimal access. Health care organizations and researchers can use the developed definitions and concepts as starting points for initiatives to improve access management.

Comparing the Recruitment of Research Participants With Chronic Low Back Pain Using Amazon Mechanical Turk With the Recruitment of Patients From Chiropractic Clinics: A Quasi-Experimental Study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the crowdsourcing platform Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk) with in-person recruitment and web-based surveys as a method to (1) recruit study participants and (2) obtain low-cost data quickly from chiropractic patients with chronic low back pain in the United States. METHODS: In this 2-arm quasi-experimental study, we used in-person clinical sampling and web-based surveys from a separate study (RAND sample, n = 1677, data collected October 2016 to January 2017) compared with MTurk (n = 310, data collected November 2016) as a sampling and data collection tool. We gathered patient-reported health outcomes and other characteristics of adults with chronic low back pain receiving chiropractic care. Parametric and nonparametric tests were run. We assessed statistical and practical differences based on P values and effect sizes, respectively. RESULTS: Compared with the RAND sample, the MTurk sample was statistically significantly younger (mean age 35.4 years, SD 9.7 vs 48.9, SD 14.8), made less money (24% vs 17% reported less than $30,000 annual income), and reported worst mental health than the RAND sample. Other differences were that the MTurk sample had more men (37% vs 29%), fewer White patients (87% vs 92%), more Hispanic patients (9% vs 5%), fewer people with a college degree (59% vs 68%), and patients were more likely to be working full time (62% vs 58%). The MTurk sample was more likely to have chronic low back pain (78% vs 66%) that differed in pain frequency and duration. The MTurk sample had less disability and better global health scores. In terms of efficiency, the surveys cost $2.50 per participant in incentives for the MTurk sample. Survey development took 2 weeks and data collection took 1 month. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that there may be differences between crowdsourcing and a clinic-based sample. These differences range from small to medium on demographics and self-reported health. The low incentive costs and rapid data collection of MTurk makes it an economically viable method of collecting data from chiropractic patients with low back pain. Further research is needed to explore the utility of MTurk for recruiting clinical samples, such as comparisons to nationally representative samples.

A protocol for chronic pain outcome measurement enhancement by linking PROMIS-29 scale to legacy measures and improving chronic pain stratification.

BACKGROUND: Substantial investment has gone into research on the efficacy and effectiveness of pharmaceutical and nonpharmacologic interventions for chronic pain. However, synthesizing this extensive literature is challenging because of differences in the outcome measures used in studies of similar or competing interventions. The absence of a common metric makes it difficult to replicate findings, pool data from multiple studies, resolve conflicting conclusions, or reach consensus when interpreting findings. METHODS: This study has a seven-member Advisory Council of chronic pain experts. Preliminary analyses will be performed on data from several large existing datasets; intermediate analyses will be performed using primary data collected from Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk); and cross-validation will use primary data collected from a nationally-representative, probability-based panel. Target sample size for both primary datasets is 1500. The three study aims are as follows: Aim 1 will develop and evaluate links between the 29-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®-29) and legacy measures used for chronic pain such as the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). We will assess the best method of score linking and create crosswalk tables. Aim 2 will evaluate and refine the Impact Stratification Score (ISS) based on 9 PROMIS-29 items and proposed by the NIH Research Task Force on chronic low back pain. We will evaluate the ISS in terms of other indicators of condition severity and patient prognosis and outcomes and identify cut-points to stratify chronic pain patients into subgroups. Aim 3 will evaluate the strengths and limitations of MTurk as a data collection platform for estimating chronic pain by comparing its data to other data sources. DISCUSSION: The accomplishment of Aims 1 and 2 will allow direct comparison of results across past and future studies of chronic pain. These comparisons will help us to understand different results from seemingly similar studies, and to determine the relative effectiveness of all pharmaceutical and nonpharmacologic interventions for chronic pain across different trials. Aim 3 findings will provide valuable information to researchers about the pros and cons of using the MTurk platform for research-based data collection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04426812 ; June 10, 2020.

Experiences With Chiropractic Care for Patients With Low Back or Neck Pain.

BACKGROUND: Musculoskeletal disorders are the second leading cause of disability worldwide. OBJECTIVE: Examine experiences of chiropractic patients in the United States with chronic low back or neck pain. METHOD: Observational study of 1853 chronic low back pain and neck pain patients (74% female) who completed an online questionnaire at the 3-month follow-up that included Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) items assessing their experiences with care. RESULTS: We found similar reports of communication for the chiropractic sample and patients in the 2016 CAHPS National Database, but 85% in the database versus 79% in the chiropractic sample gave the most positive response to the time spent with provider item. More patients in the CAHPS database rated their provider at the top of the scale (8 percentage points). More chiropractic patients reported always getting answers to questions the same day (16 percentage points) and always being seen within 15 minutes of their appointment time (29 percentage points). CONCLUSIONS: The positive experiences of patients with chronic back and neck pain are supportive of their use of chiropractic care.

Understanding U.S. Health Systems: Using Mixed Methods to Unpack Organizational Complexity.

INTRODUCTION: As hospitals and physician organizations increasingly vertically integrate, there is an important opportunity to use health systems to improve performance. Prior research has largely relied on secondary data sources, but little is known about how health systems are organized "on the ground" and what mechanisms are available to influence physician practice at the front line of care. METHODS: We collected in-depth information on eight health systems through key informant interviews, descriptive surveys, and document review. Qualitative data were systematically coded. We conducted analyses to identify organizational structures and mechanisms through which health systems influence practice. RESULTS: As expected, we found that health systems vary on multiple dimensions related to organizational structure (e.g., size, complexity) which reflects history, market and mission. With regard to levers of influence, we observed within-system variation both in mechanisms (e.g., employment of physicians, system-wide EHR, standardization of service lines) and level of influence. Concepts such as "core" versus "peripheral" were more salient than "ownership" versus "contract." DISCUSSION: Data from secondary sources can help identify and map health systems, but they do not adequately describe them or the variation that exists within and across systems. To examine the degree to which health systems can influence performance, more detailed and nuanced information on health system characteristics is necessary. CONCLUSION: The mixed-methods data accrual approach used in this study provides granular qualitative data that enables researchers to describe multi-layered health systems, grasp the context in which they operate, and identify the key drivers of performance.

Researching the Appropriateness of Care in the Complementary and Integrative Health Professions Part 3: Designing Instruments With Patient Input.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this article is to describe how we designed patient survey instruments to ensure that patient data about preferences and experience could be included in appropriateness decisions. These actions were part of a project that examined the appropriateness of spinal manipulation and mobilization for chronic low back pain and chronic neck pain. METHODS: We conducted focus groups, cognitive interviews, a literature review of measures in prior chiropractic and complementary and integrative health research, and a pilot study to develop questionnaires of patient preferences, experiences, values, and beliefs. RESULTS: Questionnaires were administered online to 2024 individuals from 125 chiropractic clinics. The survey included 3 long questionnaires and 5 shorter ones. All were administered online. The baseline items had 2 questionnaires that respondents could complete in different sittings. Respondents completed shorter biweekly follow-ups every 2 weeks and a final questionnaire at 3 months. The 2 initial questionnaires had 81 and 140 items, the 5 biweekly follow-up questionnaires had 37 items each, and the endline questionnaire contained 121 items. Participants generally responded positively to the survey items, and 91% of the patients who completed a baseline questionnaire completed the endpoint survey 3 months later. We used "legacy" measures, and we also adapted measures and developed new measures for this study. Preliminary assessment of reliability and validity for a newly developed scale about coping behaviors indicates that the items work well together in a scale. CONCLUSIONS: This article documents the challenges and the efforts involved in designing data collection tools to facilitate the inclusion of patient data into appropriateness decisions.

Mindfulness meditation for workplace wellness: An evidence map.

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness interventions aim to foster greater attention and awareness of present moment experiences. Uptake of mindfulness programs in the workplace has grown as organizations look to support employee health, wellbeing, and performance. OBJECTIVE: In support of evidence-based decision making in workplace contexts, we created an evidence map summarizing physical and mental health, cognitive, affective, and interpersonal outcomes from systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of mindfulness interventions. METHODS: We searched nine electronic databases to July 2017, dually-screened all reviews, and consulted topic experts to identify systematic reviews on mindfulness interventions. The distribution of evidence is presented as an evidence map in a bubble plot. RESULTS: In total, 175 systematic reviews met inclusion criteria. Reviews included a variety of mindfulness-based interventions. The largest review included 109 randomized controlled trials. The majority of these addressed general health, psychological conditions, chronic illness, pain, and substance use. Twenty-six systematic reviews assessed studies conducted in workplace settings and with healthcare professionals, educators, and caregivers. The evidence map shows the prevalence of research by the primary area of focus. An outline of promising applications of mindfulness interventions is included. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence map provides an overview of existing mindfulness research. It shows the body of available evidence to inform policy and organizational decision-making supporting employee wellbeing in work contexts.

Researching the Appropriateness of Care in the Complementary and Integrative Health Professions Part 4: Putting Practice Back Into Evidence-based Practice by Recruiting Clinics and Patients.

OBJECTIVES: This paper focuses on the methods of a single study, incorporating data from chiropractic clinics into an evidenced-based investigation of the appropriateness of manipulation for chronic back pain. METHODS: A cluster sample of clinics (125) from 6 sites across the United States was chosen for this observation study. Patients with chronic low-back and neck pain were recruited using iPads, completed a series of online questionnaires, and gave permission for their patient records to be scanned. Patient records for a random sample were also obtained. The RAND staff and clinic personnel collected record data. RESULTS: We obtained survey data from 2024 patients with chronic low back pain, chronic neck pain, or both. We obtained patient record data from 114 of 125 clinics. These included the records of 1475 of the individuals who had completed surveys (prospective sample), and a random sample of 2128 patients. Across 114 clinics, 22% of clinics had patient records that were fully electronic, 32% had paper files, and 46% used a combination. Of the 114 clinics, about 47% scanned the records themselves with training from RAND. We obtained a total of 3603 scanned records. The patient survey data were collected from June 2016 to February 2017, the provider surveys from June 2016 to March 2017, and the chart pull from April 2017 to December 2017. CONCLUSIONS: Clinics can be successfully recruited for practice-based studies, and patients can be recruited using iPads. Obtaining patient records presents considerable challenges, and clinics varied in whether they had electronic files, nonelectronic records, or a mixture. Clinic staff can be trained to select and scan samples of charts to comply with randomization and data protection protocols in transferring records for research purposes.

Evaluation of an Integrative Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Treatment Program.

OBJECTIVES: Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and combat-related stress can be refractory, pervasive, and have a devastating impact on those affected, their families, and society at large. Challenges dealing with symptoms may in turn make a servicemember more susceptible to problems, including alcohol abuse, interpersonal conflict, and occupational problems. An effective treatment strategy will address multifactorial issues by using a holistic multimodal approach. Back on Track is an intensive outpatient program utilizing a holistic philosophy and multimodal treatments to provide a whole systems approach for the treatment of combat-related stress reactions and PTSD in active duty servicemembers. DESIGN/SETTING/SUBJECTS: An explanatory, sequential, mixed-methods program evaluation was conducted to assess the effectiveness of a PTSD and combat stress treatment program. Quantitative outcomes were collected and analyzed on 595 participants at pre- and postinterventions and 6-week follow-up and qualitative data were gathered through participant interviews. INTERVENTION: The manualized program uses a multimodal, psychoeducational group therapy format with a holistic approach for treating combat stress, increasing resiliency, and assisting with reintegration. Rotating providers visit from other programs and services to deliver content in bio-psycho-social-spiritual domains, including didactic lectures on mindfulness and the relaxation response and daily sessions of yoga nidra and meditation. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was PTSD symptom severity assessed with the PTSD Checklist-Military Version (PCL-M). Secondary outcomes included self-efficacy, knowledge, use, and satisfaction. Quantitative data were contextualized with interview data. RESULTS: Results demonstrated a highly statistically significant effect of the program when comparing within-subject PCL-M scores before and after program participation, signed rank S (N = 595) = -47,367, p < 0.001. This translates to a moderate effect size, Cohen's d (N = 595) = -0.55, 95% confidence interval = -0.62 to -0.47, and a mean decrease of 7 points on the PCL-M at postintervention, demonstrating response to treatment. There were significant increases in knowledge and self-efficacy and high levels of satisfaction with the program overall, content, materials, and delivery. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment program has served ∼800 servicemembers since inception and has since expanded to five installations. The provision of whole systems care where the approach is holistic, multimodal, and multidisciplinary may be a way forward for the successful treatment of PTSD and other debilitating behavioral health conditions in military contexts and beyond.

Characteristics of Chiropractic Patients Being Treated for Chronic Low Back and Neck Pain.

OBJECTIVES: Chronic low back pain (CLBP) and chronic neck pain (CNP) are the most common types of chronic pain, and chiropractic spinal manipulation is a common nonpharmacologic treatment. This study presents the characteristics of a large United States sample of chiropractic patients with CLBP and CNP. METHODS: Data were collected from chiropractic patients using multistage systematic stratified sampling with 4 sampling levels: regions and states, sites (ie, metropolitan areas), providers and clinics, and patients. The sites and regions were San Diego, California; Tampa, Florida; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Seneca Falls and Upstate New York; Portland, Oregon; and Dallas, Texas. Data were collected from patients through an iPad-based prescreening questionnaire in the clinic and emailed links to full screening and baseline online questionnaires. The goal was 20 providers or clinics and 7 patients with CLBP and 7 with CNP from each clinic. RESULTS: We had 6342 patients at 125 clinics complete the prescreening questionnaire, 3333 patients start the full screening questionnaire, and 2024 eligible patients completed the baseline questionnaire: 518 with CLBP only, 347 with CNP only, and 1159 with both. In general, most of this sample were highly-educated, non-Hispanic, white females with at least partial insurance coverage for chiropractic care who have been in pain and using chiropractic care for years. Over 90% reported high satisfaction with their care, few used narcotics, and avoiding surgery was the most important reason they chose chiropractic care. CONCLUSIONS: Given the prevalence of CLBP and CNP, the need to find effective nonpharmacologic alternatives for chronic pain, and the satisfaction these patients found with their care, further study of these patients is worthwhile.

Evaluating Integrative Cancer Clinics With the Claim Assessment Profile: An Example With the InspireHealth Clinic.

BACKGROUND: The evaluation of freestanding integrative cancer clinical programs is challenging and is rarely done. We have developed an approach called the Claim Assessment Profile (CAP) to identify whether evaluation of a practice is justified, feasible, and likely to provide useful information. OBJECTIVES: A CAP was performed in order to (1) clarify the healing claims at InspireHealth, an integrative oncology treatment program, by defining the most important impacts on its clients; (2) gather information about current research capacity at the clinic; and (3) create a program theory and path model for use in prospective research. STUDY DESIGN/METHODS: This case study design incorporates methods from a variety of rapid assessment approaches. Procedures included site visits to observe the program, structured qualitative interviews with 26 providers and staff, surveys to capture descriptive data about the program, and observational data on program implementation. RESULTS: The InspireHealth program is a well-established, multi-site, thriving integrative oncology clinical practice that focuses on patient support, motivation, and health behavior engagement. It delivers patient-centered care via a standardized treatment protocol. There arehigh levels of research interest from staff and resources by which to conduct research. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides the primary descriptive and claims clarification of an integrative oncology treatment program, an evaluation readiness report, a detailed logic model explicating program theory, and a clinical outcomes path model for conducting prospective research. Prospective evaluation of this program would be feasible and valuable, adding to our knowledge base of integrative cancer therapies.

Researching the Appropriateness of Care in the Complementary and Integrative Health Professions: Part I.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this article is to report on the Center of Excellence for Research on Complementary and Alternative Medicine at RAND Corporation. The overall project examined the appropriateness of chiropractic spinal manipulation and mobilization for chronic low back pain and chronic cervical pain using the RAND and University of California Los Angeles Appropriateness Method, including patient preferences and costs, to acknowledge the importance of patient-centered care in clinical decision-making. METHODS: This article is a narrative summary of the overall project and its inter-related components (ie, 4 Research Project Grants and 2 centers), including the Data Collection Core, whose activities and learning will be the subject of a following series of methods articles. RESULTS: The project team faced many challenges in accomplishing data collection goals. The processes we developed to overcome barriers may be of use to other researchers and for practitioners who may want to participate in such studies in complementary and integrative health, which previously was known as complementary and alternative medicine. CONCLUSION: For this large, complex, successful project, we gathered online survey data, collected charts, and abstracted chart data from thousands of chiropractic patients. The present article delineates the challenges and lessons that were learned during this project so that others may gain from the authors' experience. This information may be of use to future research that collects data from independent practitioners and their patients because it provides what is needed to be successful in such studies and may encourage participation.

Claim Assessment Profile: A Method for Capturing Healthcare Evidence in the Scientific Evaluation and Review of Claims in Health Care (SEaRCH).

BACKGROUND: Grounding health claims in an evidence base is essential for determining safety and effectiveness. However, it is not appropriate to evaluate all healthcare claims with the same methods. "Gold standard" randomized controlled trials may skip over important qualitative and observational data about use, benefits, side effects, and preferences, issues especially salient in research on complementary and integrative health (CIH) practices. This gap has prompted a move toward studying treatments in their naturalistic settings. In the 1990s, a program initiated under the National Institutes of Health was designed to provide an outreach to CIH practices for assessing the feasibility of conducting retrospective or prospective evaluations. The Claim Assessment Profile further develops this approach, within the framework of Samueli Institute's Scientific Evaluation and Review of Claims in Health Care (SEaRCH) method. METHODS/DESIGN: The goals of a Claim Assessment Profile are to clarify the elements that constitute a practice, define key outcomes, and create an explanatory model of these impacts. The main objective is to determine readiness and capacity of a practice to engage in evaluation of effectiveness. This approach is informed by a variety of rapid assessment and stakeholder-driven methods. Site visits, structured qualitative interviews, surveys, and observational data on implementation provide descriptive data about the practice. Logic modeling defines inputs, processes, and outcome variables; Path modeling defines an analytic map to explore. DISCUSSION: The Claim Assessment Profile is a rapid assessment of the evaluability of a healthcare practice. The method was developed for use on CIH practices but has also been applied in resilience research and may be applied beyond the healthcare sector. Findings are meant to provide sufficient data to improve decision-making for stakeholders. This method provides an important first step for moving existing promising yet untested practices into comprehensive evaluation.

Meditation for posttraumatic stress: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis that synthesized evidence from randomized controlled trials of meditation interventions to provide estimates of their efficacy and safety in treating adults diagnosed with posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). This review was based on an established protocol (PROSPERO: CRD42015025782) and is reported according to PRISMA guidelines. Outcomes of interest included PTSD symptoms, depression, anxiety, health-related quality of life, functional status, and adverse events. METHOD: Meta-analyses were conducted using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random-effects models. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grade of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. RESULTS: In total, 10 trials on meditation interventions for PTSD with 643 participants met inclusion criteria. Across interventions, adjunctive meditation interventions of mindfulness-based stress reduction, yoga, and the mantram repetition program improve PTSD and depression symptoms compared with control groups, but the findings are based on low and moderate quality of evidence. Effects were positive but not statistically significant for quality of life and anxiety, and no studies addressed functional status. The variety of meditation intervention types, the short follow-up times, and the quality of studies limited analyses. No adverse events were reported in the included studies; only half of the studies reported on safety. CONCLUSIONS: Meditation appears to be effective for PTSD and depression symptoms, but in order to increase confidence in findings, more high-quality studies are needed on meditation as adjunctive treatment with PTSD-diagnosed participant samples large enough to detect statistical differences in outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record

Mindfulness Meditation for Chronic Pain: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic pain patients increasingly seek treatment through mindfulness meditation. PURPOSE: This study aims to synthesize evidence on efficacy and safety of mindfulness meditation interventions for the treatment of chronic pain in adults. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with meta-analyses using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random-effects models. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE approach. Outcomes included pain, depression, quality of life, and analgesic use. RESULTS: Thirty-eight RCTs met inclusion criteria; seven reported on safety. We found low-quality evidence that mindfulness meditation is associated with a small decrease in pain compared with all types of controls in 30 RCTs. Statistically significant effects were also found for depression symptoms and quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: While mindfulness meditation improves pain and depression symptoms and quality of life, additional well-designed, rigorous, and large-scale RCTs are needed to decisively provide estimates of the efficacy of mindfulness meditation for chronic pain.