Efficacy of basic body awareness therapy on functional outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Davy Vancampfort; Emanuel Brunner; Tine Van Damme; Brendon Stubbs

doi:10.1002/pri.1975

Efficacy of basic body awareness therapy on functional outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Davy Vancampfort^*, Emanuel Brunner, Tine Van Damme, Brendon Stubbs

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: This study examined the efficacy of basis body awareness therapy (BBAT) on functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) in patients with mental health problems and long-lasting conditions including musculoskeletal disorders, chronic and psychosomatic pain, and neurological conditions. Material and Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro from inception to April 1st, 2022. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to explore the efficacy of BBAT versus non-active and active control conditions. Results: Eight RCTs (n BBAT = 307, n controls = 428) were included. There was no evidence for reductions in anxiety (standardized mean difference [SMD] = −1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −3.30 to 0.46, p = 0.14), depression (SMD = −0.82, 95% CI = −1.85 to 0.21, p = 0.12), and no improvements in global assessment of functioning for functioning (GAF-F) (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI = −0.03 to 1.19, p = 0.06) or for symptoms (GAF-S) (SMD = 0.76, 95% CI = −0.44 to 1.96, p = 0.21) in BBAT versus non-active control conditions. BBAT reduced anxiety significantly more than active interventions (SMD = −0.84, 95% CI = −1.17 to −0.51, p < 0.001). No significant differences between BBAT and active control conditions were found for reduction in depression (SMD = −1.16, 95% CI = −2.74 to 0.41, p = 0.15) or in self-reported pain (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI = −0.25 to 0.40, p = 0.65). Active control conditions were superior in improving QoL (SMD = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.17, p < 0.001), GAF-F (SMD = 1.58, 95% CI = 0.29 to 2.86, p = 0.016) and GAF-S (SMD = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.53, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Physiotherapists should be cautious in adopting BBAT, noting there is no high-quality evidence to support its' use to improve functionality and QoL in patients with mental health problems and/or long-lasting conditions.

Original language	English
Journal	Physiotherapy Research International
Early online date	14 Sept 2022
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1002/pri.1975
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 14 Sept 2022

Keywords

anxiety
awareness
depression
exercise
functional status
mind-body therapies

Access to Document

10.1002/pri.1975

Cite this

@article{b9ec7f62d090461591086495d3de0787,

title = "Efficacy of basic body awareness therapy on functional outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials",

abstract = "Purpose: This study examined the efficacy of basis body awareness therapy (BBAT) on functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) in patients with mental health problems and long-lasting conditions including musculoskeletal disorders, chronic and psychosomatic pain, and neurological conditions. Material and Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro from inception to April 1st, 2022. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to explore the efficacy of BBAT versus non-active and active control conditions. Results: Eight RCTs (n BBAT = 307, n controls = 428) were included. There was no evidence for reductions in anxiety (standardized mean difference [SMD] = −1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −3.30 to 0.46, p = 0.14), depression (SMD = −0.82, 95% CI = −1.85 to 0.21, p = 0.12), and no improvements in global assessment of functioning for functioning (GAF-F) (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI = −0.03 to 1.19, p = 0.06) or for symptoms (GAF-S) (SMD = 0.76, 95% CI = −0.44 to 1.96, p = 0.21) in BBAT versus non-active control conditions. BBAT reduced anxiety significantly more than active interventions (SMD = −0.84, 95% CI = −1.17 to −0.51, p < 0.001). No significant differences between BBAT and active control conditions were found for reduction in depression (SMD = −1.16, 95% CI = −2.74 to 0.41, p = 0.15) or in self-reported pain (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI = −0.25 to 0.40, p = 0.65). Active control conditions were superior in improving QoL (SMD = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.17, p < 0.001), GAF-F (SMD = 1.58, 95% CI = 0.29 to 2.86, p = 0.016) and GAF-S (SMD = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.53, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Physiotherapists should be cautious in adopting BBAT, noting there is no high-quality evidence to support its' use to improve functionality and QoL in patients with mental health problems and/or long-lasting conditions.",

keywords = "anxiety, awareness, depression, exercise, functional status, mind-body therapies",

author = "Davy Vancampfort and Emanuel Brunner and {Van Damme}, Tine and Brendon Stubbs",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.",

year = "2022",

month = sep,

day = "14",

doi = "10.1002/pri.1975",

language = "English",

journal = "Physiotherapy Research International",

issn = "1358-2267",

publisher = "John Wiley and sons",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Efficacy of basic body awareness therapy on functional outcomes

T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AU - Vancampfort, Davy

AU - Brunner, Emanuel

AU - Van Damme, Tine

AU - Stubbs, Brendon

PY - 2022/9/14

Y1 - 2022/9/14

N2 - Purpose: This study examined the efficacy of basis body awareness therapy (BBAT) on functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) in patients with mental health problems and long-lasting conditions including musculoskeletal disorders, chronic and psychosomatic pain, and neurological conditions. Material and Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro from inception to April 1st, 2022. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to explore the efficacy of BBAT versus non-active and active control conditions. Results: Eight RCTs (n BBAT = 307, n controls = 428) were included. There was no evidence for reductions in anxiety (standardized mean difference [SMD] = −1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −3.30 to 0.46, p = 0.14), depression (SMD = −0.82, 95% CI = −1.85 to 0.21, p = 0.12), and no improvements in global assessment of functioning for functioning (GAF-F) (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI = −0.03 to 1.19, p = 0.06) or for symptoms (GAF-S) (SMD = 0.76, 95% CI = −0.44 to 1.96, p = 0.21) in BBAT versus non-active control conditions. BBAT reduced anxiety significantly more than active interventions (SMD = −0.84, 95% CI = −1.17 to −0.51, p < 0.001). No significant differences between BBAT and active control conditions were found for reduction in depression (SMD = −1.16, 95% CI = −2.74 to 0.41, p = 0.15) or in self-reported pain (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI = −0.25 to 0.40, p = 0.65). Active control conditions were superior in improving QoL (SMD = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.17, p < 0.001), GAF-F (SMD = 1.58, 95% CI = 0.29 to 2.86, p = 0.016) and GAF-S (SMD = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.53, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Physiotherapists should be cautious in adopting BBAT, noting there is no high-quality evidence to support its' use to improve functionality and QoL in patients with mental health problems and/or long-lasting conditions.

AB - Purpose: This study examined the efficacy of basis body awareness therapy (BBAT) on functional outcomes and quality of life (QoL) in patients with mental health problems and long-lasting conditions including musculoskeletal disorders, chronic and psychosomatic pain, and neurological conditions. Material and Methods: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PEDro from inception to April 1st, 2022. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to explore the efficacy of BBAT versus non-active and active control conditions. Results: Eight RCTs (n BBAT = 307, n controls = 428) were included. There was no evidence for reductions in anxiety (standardized mean difference [SMD] = −1.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] = −3.30 to 0.46, p = 0.14), depression (SMD = −0.82, 95% CI = −1.85 to 0.21, p = 0.12), and no improvements in global assessment of functioning for functioning (GAF-F) (SMD = 0.58, 95% CI = −0.03 to 1.19, p = 0.06) or for symptoms (GAF-S) (SMD = 0.76, 95% CI = −0.44 to 1.96, p = 0.21) in BBAT versus non-active control conditions. BBAT reduced anxiety significantly more than active interventions (SMD = −0.84, 95% CI = −1.17 to −0.51, p < 0.001). No significant differences between BBAT and active control conditions were found for reduction in depression (SMD = −1.16, 95% CI = −2.74 to 0.41, p = 0.15) or in self-reported pain (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI = −0.25 to 0.40, p = 0.65). Active control conditions were superior in improving QoL (SMD = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.17, p < 0.001), GAF-F (SMD = 1.58, 95% CI = 0.29 to 2.86, p = 0.016) and GAF-S (SMD = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.53, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Physiotherapists should be cautious in adopting BBAT, noting there is no high-quality evidence to support its' use to improve functionality and QoL in patients with mental health problems and/or long-lasting conditions.

KW - anxiety

KW - awareness

KW - depression

KW - exercise

KW - functional status

KW - mind-body therapies

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85137921819&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1002/pri.1975

DO - 10.1002/pri.1975

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85137921819

SN - 1358-2267

JO - Physiotherapy Research International

JF - Physiotherapy Research International

ER -

Efficacy of basic body awareness therapy on functional outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this