Aromatherapy for dementia.


Journal

The Cochrane database of systematic reviews
ISSN: 1469-493X
Titre abrégé: Cochrane Database Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100909747

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
19 08 2020
Historique:
entrez: 20 8 2020
pubmed: 20 8 2020
medline: 10 10 2020
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Medications licensed for the treatment of dementia have limited efficacy against cognitive impairment or against the distressed behaviours (behavioural and psychological symptoms, or behaviour that challenges) which are also often the most distressing aspect of the disorder for caregivers. Complementary therapies, including aromatherapy, are attractive to patients, practitioners and families, because they are perceived as being unlikely to cause adverse effects. Therefore there is interest in whether aromatherapy might offer a safe means of alleviating distressed behaviours in dementia. To assess the efficacy and safety of aromatherapy for people with dementia. We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group Specialized Register, on 5 May 2020 using the terms: aromatherapy, lemon, lavender, rose, aroma, alternative therapies, complementary therapies, essential oils. In addition, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO (all via Ovid SP), Web of Science Core Collection (via Thompson Web of Science), LILACS (via BIREME), CENTRAL (via the Cochrane Library), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal (ICTRP) on 5 May 2020. We included randomised controlled trials which compared fragrance from plants in an intervention defined as aromatherapy for people with dementia with placebo aromatherapy or with treatment as usual. All doses, frequencies and fragrances of aromatherapy were considered. Participants in the included studies had a diagnosis of dementia of any subtype and severity. Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias in included studies, involving other authors to reach consensus decisions where necessary. We did not perform any meta-analyses because of heterogeneity between studies, but presented a narrative synthesis of results from the included trials. Because of the heterogeneity of analysis methods and inadequate or absent reporting of data from some trials, we used statistical significance (P ≤ or > 0.5) as a summary metric when synthesising results across studies. As far as possible, we used GRADE methods to assess our confidence in the results of the trials, downgrading for risk of bias and imprecision. We included 13 studies with 708 participants. All participants had dementia and in the 12 trials which described the setting, all were resident in institutional care facilities. Nine trials recruited participants because they had significant agitation or other behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia (BPSD) at baseline. The fragrances used were lavender (eight studies); lemon balm (four studies); lavender and lemon balm, lavender and orange, and cedar extracts (one study each). For six trials, assessment of risk of bias and extraction of results was hampered by poor reporting. Four of the other seven trials were at low risk of bias in all domains, but all were small (range 18 to 186 participants; median 66), reducing our confidence in the results. Our primary outcomes were agitation, overall behavioural and psychological symptoms, and adverse effects. Ten trials assessed agitation using various scales. Among the five trials for which our confidence in the results was moderate or low, four trials reported no significant effect on agitation and one trial reported a significant benefit of aromatherapy. The other five trials either reported no useable data or our confidence in the results was very low. Eight trials assessed overall BPSD using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory and we had moderate or low confidence in the results of five of them. Of these, four reported significant benefit from aromatherapy and one reported no significant effect. Adverse events were poorly reported or not reported at all in most trials. No more than two trials assessed each of our secondary outcomes of quality of life, mood, sleep, activities of daily living, caregiver burden. We did not find evidence of benefit on these outcomes. Three trials assessed cognition: one did not report any data and the other two trials reported no significant effect of aromatherapy on cognition. Our confidence in the results of these studies was low. We have not found any convincing evidence that aromatherapy (or exposure to fragrant plant oils) is beneficial for people with dementia although there are many limitations to the data. Conduct or reporting problems in half of the included studies meant that they could not contribute to the conclusions. Results from the other studies were inconsistent. Harms were very poorly reported in the included studies. In order for clear conclusions to be drawn, better design and reporting and consistency of outcome measurement in future trials would be needed.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Medications licensed for the treatment of dementia have limited efficacy against cognitive impairment or against the distressed behaviours (behavioural and psychological symptoms, or behaviour that challenges) which are also often the most distressing aspect of the disorder for caregivers. Complementary therapies, including aromatherapy, are attractive to patients, practitioners and families, because they are perceived as being unlikely to cause adverse effects. Therefore there is interest in whether aromatherapy might offer a safe means of alleviating distressed behaviours in dementia.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the efficacy and safety of aromatherapy for people with dementia.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched ALOIS, the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group Specialized Register, on 5 May 2020 using the terms: aromatherapy, lemon, lavender, rose, aroma, alternative therapies, complementary therapies, essential oils. In addition, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO (all via Ovid SP), Web of Science Core Collection (via Thompson Web of Science), LILACS (via BIREME), CENTRAL (via the Cochrane Library), ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization (WHO) trials portal (ICTRP) on 5 May 2020.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials which compared fragrance from plants in an intervention defined as aromatherapy for people with dementia with placebo aromatherapy or with treatment as usual. All doses, frequencies and fragrances of aromatherapy were considered. Participants in the included studies had a diagnosis of dementia of any subtype and severity.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed risk of bias in included studies, involving other authors to reach consensus decisions where necessary. We did not perform any meta-analyses because of heterogeneity between studies, but presented a narrative synthesis of results from the included trials. Because of the heterogeneity of analysis methods and inadequate or absent reporting of data from some trials, we used statistical significance (P ≤ or > 0.5) as a summary metric when synthesising results across studies. As far as possible, we used GRADE methods to assess our confidence in the results of the trials, downgrading for risk of bias and imprecision.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 13 studies with 708 participants. All participants had dementia and in the 12 trials which described the setting, all were resident in institutional care facilities. Nine trials recruited participants because they had significant agitation or other behavioural and psychological symptoms in dementia (BPSD) at baseline. The fragrances used were lavender (eight studies); lemon balm (four studies); lavender and lemon balm, lavender and orange, and cedar extracts (one study each). For six trials, assessment of risk of bias and extraction of results was hampered by poor reporting. Four of the other seven trials were at low risk of bias in all domains, but all were small (range 18 to 186 participants; median 66), reducing our confidence in the results. Our primary outcomes were agitation, overall behavioural and psychological symptoms, and adverse effects. Ten trials assessed agitation using various scales. Among the five trials for which our confidence in the results was moderate or low, four trials reported no significant effect on agitation and one trial reported a significant benefit of aromatherapy. The other five trials either reported no useable data or our confidence in the results was very low. Eight trials assessed overall BPSD using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory and we had moderate or low confidence in the results of five of them. Of these, four reported significant benefit from aromatherapy and one reported no significant effect. Adverse events were poorly reported or not reported at all in most trials. No more than two trials assessed each of our secondary outcomes of quality of life, mood, sleep, activities of daily living, caregiver burden. We did not find evidence of benefit on these outcomes. Three trials assessed cognition: one did not report any data and the other two trials reported no significant effect of aromatherapy on cognition. Our confidence in the results of these studies was low.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We have not found any convincing evidence that aromatherapy (or exposure to fragrant plant oils) is beneficial for people with dementia although there are many limitations to the data. Conduct or reporting problems in half of the included studies meant that they could not contribute to the conclusions. Results from the other studies were inconsistent. Harms were very poorly reported in the included studies. In order for clear conclusions to be drawn, better design and reporting and consistency of outcome measurement in future trials would be needed.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32813272
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003150.pub3
pmc: PMC7437395
doi:

Substances chimiques

Oils, Volatile 0

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02126059', 'NCT03108781']

Types de publication

Journal Article Meta-Analysis Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

CD003150

Commentaires et corrections

Type : UpdateOf

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Références

Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2007 May;22(5):405-10
pubmed: 17342790
Br J Clin Psychol. 1997 May;36(2):287-96
pubmed: 9167869
Int J Nurs Pract. 1998 Jun;4(2):70-83
pubmed: 9748936
Br J Psychiatry. 1982 Jun;140:566-72
pubmed: 7104545
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Feb 22;2:CD013306
pubmed: 33704781
Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2013 Apr;13(2):516-7
pubmed: 23551355
Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2008 Jun;8(2):136-8
pubmed: 18713168
Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 1997 Oct;51(5):281-7
pubmed: 9413874
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Sep 22;9:CD001191
pubmed: 26393402
Int J Clin Pract. 2012 Oct;66(10):924-39
pubmed: 22994327
J Pharm Pharmacol. 2011 Oct;63(10):1368-71
pubmed: 21899553
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2001 Oct;16(10):1010-3
pubmed: 11607948
J Psychiatr Res. 1975 Nov;12(3):189-98
pubmed: 1202204
J Clin Psychiatry. 2012 Mar;73(3):392-9
pubmed: 22152398
J Drug Assess. 2017 Jan 23;6(1):1-5
pubmed: 28265482
Aust J Holist Nurs. 1998 Oct;5(2):47-9
pubmed: 10428895
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016 Aug 1;17(8):719-24
pubmed: 27168052
Neuropsychopharmacol Rep. 2020 Mar;40(1):10-15
pubmed: 32037737
Md State Med J. 1965 Feb;14:61-5
pubmed: 14258950
Psychogeriatrics. 2009 Dec;9(4):173-9
pubmed: 20377818
Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2017 Aug 10;19(9):64
pubmed: 28795386
Rejuvenation Res. 2019 Jun;22(3):246-253
pubmed: 30328781
Geriatr Gerontol Int. 2012 Jul;12(3):372-82
pubmed: 22433025
J Clin Nurs. 2018 May;27(9-10):1812-1825
pubmed: 28986942
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 1996 Jan;51(1):P3-14
pubmed: 8548515
Funct Neurol. 2018 Jul/Sept;33(3):143-147
pubmed: 30457967
J Altern Complement Med. 2004 Jun;10(3):431-7
pubmed: 15253846
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2003 Mar;55(3):226-33
pubmed: 12630971
Int J Neurosci. 2003 Jan;113(1):15-38
pubmed: 12690999
Ageing Res Rev. 2019 Nov;55:100956
pubmed: 31479764
Complement Ther Med. 2019 Feb;42:366-373
pubmed: 30670268
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006 Jan 25;(1):CD005593
pubmed: 16437532
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2008 Apr;23(4):337-46
pubmed: 17918182
Int J Nurs Stud. 2020 Feb;102:103489
pubmed: 31862527
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Mar 20;3:CD003154
pubmed: 30891742
BMC Geriatr. 2010 Jul 22;10:49
pubmed: 20649945
Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2002 May-Jun;17(3):169-74
pubmed: 12083347
J Gerontol Nurs. 2016 Sep 1;42(9):38-46
pubmed: 27319407
J Alzheimers Dis. 2016 Jul 27;54(1):129-33
pubmed: 27472878
BMJ. 2015 Mar 02;350:h369
pubmed: 25731881
Chem Senses. 2001 Mar;26(3):267-80
pubmed: 11287387
J Altern Complement Med. 2015 Dec;21(12):759-65
pubmed: 26383176
Am J Psychiatry. 1984 Nov;141(11):1356-64
pubmed: 6496779
Neurology. 1994 Dec;44(12):2308-14
pubmed: 7991117
Aging Ment Health. 2009 Jul;13(4):512-20
pubmed: 19629775
J Psychiatr Res. 2012 Mar;46(3):402-6
pubmed: 22208995
J Clin Psychiatry. 2002 Jul;63(7):553-8
pubmed: 12143909
Phytomedicine. 2012 Jun 15;19(8-9):836-9
pubmed: 22510493
Geriatr Nurs. 2017 May - Jun;38(3):231-237
pubmed: 27912905
J Altern Complement Med. 2015 Feb;21(2):61-8
pubmed: 25584799
BMC Complement Altern Med. 2013 Jul 10;13:165
pubmed: 23837414
Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 1999 Dec;33(6):789-99
pubmed: 10619204
Clin Rehabil. 2011 Jul;25(7):607-16
pubmed: 21382864
Int Psychogeriatr. 2012 Jun;24(6):856-70
pubmed: 22244371
Molecules. 2012 Mar 12;17(3):3082-92
pubmed: 22410418
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Jun 18;6:CD001190
pubmed: 29923184
Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord. 2011;31(2):158-64
pubmed: 21335973
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Feb 25;(2):CD003150
pubmed: 24569873
BMC Complement Altern Med. 2015 Mar 29;15:93
pubmed: 25880034
Br J Psychiatry. 2014 Dec;205(6):436-42
pubmed: 25452601
J Gerontol Nurs. 1999 Feb;25(2):42-51
pubmed: 10347436
BMC Complement Altern Med. 2013 Nov 13;13:315
pubmed: 24219098
Hum Psychopharmacol. 2014 Jul;29(4):351-9
pubmed: 25163440
Am J Psychiatry. 2016 May 1;173(5):543-6
pubmed: 27133416
Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2002 Apr;17(4):305-8
pubmed: 11994882
Int J Risk Saf Med. 2012 Jan 1;24(3):147-61
pubmed: 22936057
Brain. 2005 Sep;128(Pt 9):2006-15
pubmed: 15975947
Phytomedicine. 2012 Apr 15;19(6):529-34
pubmed: 22402245
J Med Food. 2012 Jan;15(1):10-7
pubmed: 21877951
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2003 Jul;74(7):863-6
pubmed: 12810768
Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 1994 Winter;2(1):52-59
pubmed: 28531073
Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:218980
pubmed: 26693477
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(3):CD003150
pubmed: 12917949
J Nurs Res. 2008 Sep;16(3):202-10
pubmed: 18792890
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2012 Jun;60(6):1005-11
pubmed: 22646853

Auteurs

Emily L Ball (EL)

Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Bethan Owen-Booth (B)

Occupational Therapy, Glyndŵr University Wrexham, Wrexham, UK.
Stroke Unit, Glan Clwyd Hospital, BCUHB, Rhyl, UK.

Amy Gray (A)

Medicine of the Elderly, Health Education England North East, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Susan D Shenkin (SD)

Geriatric Medicine, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.

Jonathan Hewitt (J)

3rd Floor, Academic Building, Llandough Hospital., Cardiff University and Aneurin Bevan Health Board, Cardiff, UK.

Jenny McCleery (J)

Oxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Banbury, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH