Observational studyBMC complementary medicine and therapies2025
Evaluation of the efficacy of aromatherapy and complementary yoga on indicators of medication regimen complexity: A retrospective study.
Observational study in BMC complementary medicine and therapies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 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.
methodsThis 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.
results96 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).
conclusionsThis study determined patient profiles receiving complementary approaches, and changes in prescription drugs. The frequency of complementary approaches might have affected the changes in prescription.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.