Mindfulness meditation for Chinese patients with psychosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
T. J. Tao, C. Hui, Bertha S. T. Lam, E. Ho, Priscilla Wing Man Hui, Y. Suen, J. Lin, A. C. Y. Tong, E. Lee, S. Chan, W. Chang, E. Chen
Schizophrenia Research September 9, 2021 DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2021.08.033 (opens in new tab) via Semantic Scholar
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractMindfulness meditation improves a range of outcomes for Chinese patients with psychosis, most consistently and sustainably for insight, rehospitalization duration, recovery rate, and social functioning. Evidence from 23 articles (20 studies) involving 1749 patients showed that age and duration of illness, but not total intervention hours, moderated overall efficacy. Post-meditation improvements in mindfulness were related to improvements in clinical and well-being outcomes. The effects may be driven by promoting positive personal growth and enhancing coping with illness and symptoms. Results should be considered in light of varying study quality and heterogeneity; further research is needed on sustainability, active ingredients, mechanisms, and additional moderators.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Systematic review and meta-analysis Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 1,749 |
| Population | Chinese patients with psychosis |
| Intervention | Mindfulness meditation |
| Keywords | Medicine Psychology |
| Key finding | Mindfulness meditation improved insight, rehospitalization duration, recovery rate, and social functioning in Chinese patients with psychosis. |
Abstract
Mindfulness meditation (MM) and its alignment with the mind-body perspective of health in Chinese cultures indicate its potential to benefit Chinese patients with psychosis. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to address the following questions: (1) Does MM improve clinical, well-being, and third-wave outcomes (i.e., mindfulness, acceptance, and compassion levels) among Chinese patients with psychosis? (2) What are the patient- and/or intervention-specific factors that moderate the efficacy of MM? (3) Are improvements on third-wave outcomes associated with improvements on clinical and well-being outcomes? (4) What are the mechanisms underlying the effects of MM? Evidence synthesized from 23 relevant articles (20 studies) involving 1749 patients showed that (1) MM improved a wide range of patients' outcomes, most consistently and sustainably for insight, rehospitalization duration, recovery rate, and social functioning; (2) age and duration of illness, but not the cumulated intervention hours, moderated the overall efficacy of MM; (3) post-MM improvements on mindfulness and on clinical and well-being outcomes were related, and (4) the effects of MM on patients' outcomes may be driven by its ability to promote positive changes in personal growth and enhance one's coping with the illness and its symptoms. Our data showed preliminary support for the benefits of MM in Chinese patients with psychosis. However, results should be considered in light of the varying quality of included studies and their heterogeneity in multiple aspects. Further research is needed to deduce the sustainability of MM's effects, its active ingredients, underlying mechanisms, and additional moderators of its efficacy.