Soderlind, Jennifer N.

Background: Chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNLBP) is a prevalent, disabling condition worldwide. Tuina, a traditional Chinese manual therapy, has shown potential benefits, but evidence remains limited. Objective: This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of Tuina therapy in managing CNLBP in a U.S. population. Methods: A prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted at Mayo Clinic Rochester campus (February 2020-April 2024). 204 participants with CNLBP were randomized into 3 groups: Tuina (N = 68), physical therapy (N = 68), or a combination of both (N = 68). Each group received 6 treatments over 2 months. The primary outcome was pain intensity (VAS); secondary outcomes included disability (ODI), quality of life (SF-36), and adverse events. Additionally, participants completed a satisfaction survey at the end of the trial. Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) was used for survey data collection. Data was assessed by analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the multiple repeated measurements, Kruskal-Wallis tests, while Chi-square tests, and Bonferroni correction in SAS software. Results: 185 subjects completed the study. Significant decreases in VAS, ODI, and SF-36 Overall Physical scores were found from baseline, to post treatment and follow-up in all groups ( P < .05), while there were no significant differences in VAS, ODI, or SF-36 outcomes between the Tuina group and the other 2 groups. There were 4 adverse events observed in the trial, 1 in the Physical therapy group and 3 in the Mixed group. Only 1 transient low back pain after Tuina therapy was observed in the Mixed group but did not require treatment. The high percentage of patients who received the Tuina program was extremely helpful (n = 94/126, 77.0%). The willingness to recommend was significantly higher for Tuina compared to physical therapy (Mixed group [N = 59/62, 95.2%], Tuina group [N = 57/64, 91.9%], and physical therapy group [N = 31/59, 59.6%] ( P < .05). Conclusion: Tuina therapy showed comparable benefits to physical therapy and combined treatment of both in improving pain, function, and quality of life in patients with CNLBP. With high patient satisfaction and a favorable safety profile, Tuina appears to be a safe and acceptable non-invasive treatment option. Further studies are needed to validate these findings in the future.

Background More than 1 in 5 US adults live with mental illness. Novel therapies as complements to standard therapies are needed to improve patient well-being. Reiki is a biofield therapy that may improve well-being in mental health. Objective The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of providing Reiki at a behavioral health clinic serving a low-income population. The secondary aim was to evaluate outcomes in terms of patients’ symptoms, emotions, and feelings before and after Reiki. Methods This was a mixed-methods, feasibility pilot study with a pre-post experimental design. Reiki was offered to adult outpatients at a community behavioral health center in Rochester, Minnesota. Patients with a stable mental health diagnosis seen between July 22, 2021, and May 18, 2023, completed surveys before and after the Reiki intervention and provided qualitative feedback. Patients were asked to report their ratings of pain, anxiety, fatigue, and feelings (eg, happy, calm) on 0- to 10-point numeric rating scales. Data were analyzed with Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Results Among 91 patients who completed a Reiki session during the study period, 74 (81%) were women. Major depressive disorder (71%), posttraumatic stress disorder (47%), and generalized anxiety disorder (43%) were the most common diagnoses. The study was feasible in terms of recruitment, retention, data quality, acceptability, and fidelity of the intervention. Patient ratings of pain, fatigue, anxiety, stress, sadness, and agitation were significantly lower, and ratings of happiness, energy levels, relaxation, and calmness were significantly higher after a single Reiki session. Conclusion The results of this study suggest that Reiki is feasible and could be fit into the flow of clinical care in an outpatient behavioral health clinic. It improved positive emotions and feelings and decreased negative measures. Implementing Reiki in clinical practice should be further explored to improve mental health and well-being.

Background Before the COVID-19 pandemic began, medical staff and academic department workers reported increasing levels of stress and burnout because of strain on the health care system. The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated this strain and introduced several novel stressors, which included transitioning to remote work. Safe and scalable strategies are needed to help health care workers cope with these stressors. Aromatherapy may help address this need. Objectives To assess the effect of 2 aromatherapy interventions (essential oil blends termed STILL and FOCUS) on perceived mental/psychological health parameters for academic department workers working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods Participants were advised to use STILL for 5 days (Monday through Friday). After a 2-day washout period (Saturday and Sunday), participants were instructed to use FOCUS for 5 days (Monday through Friday). Participants completed a visual analog scale survey evaluating restlessness, fatigue, anxiety, stress, happiness, energy, relaxation, calmness, and well-being before and after each of the 2 intervention periods. Results Twenty academic department remote workers participated in the study. Mental/psychological health surveys were completed by 6 participants before and after using STILL and by 10 before and after using FOCUS. Five participants answered all survey questions before and after both interventions. Although mean (SD) perceived stress scores improved after both the STILL (4.3 [2.3] vs 1.8 [1.7], P = .03) and FOCUS (2.9 [2.3] vs 1.5 [1.4], P = .02) interventions, this improvement was not statistically significant after Bonferroni correction (adjusted α = .006). Most participants (73.3%) reported that participating in the study was worthwhile, and 81.3% indicated that they would recommend aromatherapy to others. Conclusions The STILL and FOCUS aromatherapy interventions did not significantly improve mental/psychological health parameters for remote academic department workers, although perceived stress was marginally improved and participants reported a perceived benefit from using aromatherapy.