Research: COOKE and ERNST,

Listed in Issue 62

Abstract

COOKE and ERNST, Department of Complementary Medicine, School of Postgraduate Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Exeter, UK, conducted a systematic review (28 references) of aromatherapy .

Background

In this study the authors stated that Aromatherapy is becoming increasingly popular despite the fact there are few clear indications for its use. The authors reviewed the literature on aromatherapy in order to discover whether any clinical indication may be recommended for its use.

Methodology

Computerised literature searches were performed to retrieve all randomised controlled trials of aromatherapy from the following databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, British Nursing Index, CISCOM, and AMED. The methodological quality of the trials was assessed using the Jadad score. Trials were independently evaluated and data were extracted in a pre-defined, standardised fashion.

Results

Twelve trials were located: six of them had no independent replication; six related to the relaxing effects of aromatherapy combined with massage . These studies suggest that aromatherapy massage has a mild, transient anxiolytic effect .

Conclusion

The authors concluded that based on a critical assessment of the six studies relating to relaxation, the effects of aromatherapy are probably not strong enough for it to be considered for the treatment of anxiety. The hypothesis that it is effective for any other indication is not supported by the findings of rigorous clinical trials.

References

Cooke B and Ernst E. Aromatherapy: a systematic review. British Journal of General Practice 50(455): 493-6. Jun 2000.

Comment

Readers should be aware that the authors' conclusions (that the evidence is not strong enough to support massage being considered for the treatment of anxiety) were based only upon the very few randomized controlled studies (6) in which the data were standardized, and do not in any way reflect the considerably larger clinical body of literature belonging to aromatherapy. This is a problem as I see it in today's somewhat obsessive attention only to research of a certain design, i.e., randomized controlled trials. It is, in my opinion, simply not valid to disregard all other clinical research and draw conclusions based on a very few published trials.

ICAN 2024 Skyscraper

Scientific and Medical Network 2

Cycle Around the World for Charity 2023

Climb Mount Kilimanjaro Charity 2023

top of the page