Riitta Hoffren-Larsson1, Barbro Gustafsson, Torkel Falkenberg. 1. Unit for Studies of Integrative Health Care, Division of Nursing, Department of Neurobiology, Care Sciences and Society, Karolinska Institute, Huddinge, Sweden. Riitta.Hoffren-Larsson@ki.se
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This exploratory study examines the Rosen Method Bodywork (RMB), a complementary (CAM) therapy method that previously lacked scientific documentation. The objectives of this study were to describe (1) why clients consult RMB and (2) what kind of help or benefit (if any) the clients perceive. METHODS: The study comprised a survey of 53 Swedish RMB clients sampled from therapists, based on a criterion of personal experience of the therapy method, responding to a questionnaire collecting both qualitative and quantitative data. The quantitative data were analyzed descriptively and the qualitative data were analyzed by applying content analysis. RESULTS: Reasons to use the therapy method included physical health problems, psychological problems, and a need for personal growth. A majority of the clients reported that the therapy had helped them with their problems to "a very high" or "high" degree. The main finding is five different categories describing the benefits: enhanced psychological health, enhanced physical health, increased awareness of the mind-body connection, support for personal growth, and self-initiated life changes. CONCLUSIONS: Most RMB clients in this study indicated satisfaction with the treatment. The perceived benefits were found to be related to five separate categories. However, the results of this exploratory study cannot be generalized to a target population or to any conclusions about causality, as there is reason to assume that clients with positive experiences were overrepresented in the study population, due to the selection procedure. The results indicate that an analysis focusing on the interaction between client and therapist from a nursing theoretical perspective may increase the knowledge about mechanisms that create perceived benefits, since several aspects of the therapy seem to be related to high-quality nursing.
OBJECTIVES: This exploratory study examines the Rosen Method Bodywork (RMB), a complementary (CAM) therapy method that previously lacked scientific documentation. The objectives of this study were to describe (1) why clients consult RMB and (2) what kind of help or benefit (if any) the clients perceive. METHODS: The study comprised a survey of 53 Swedish RMB clients sampled from therapists, based on a criterion of personal experience of the therapy method, responding to a questionnaire collecting both qualitative and quantitative data. The quantitative data were analyzed descriptively and the qualitative data were analyzed by applying content analysis. RESULTS: Reasons to use the therapy method included physical health problems, psychological problems, and a need for personal growth. A majority of the clients reported that the therapy had helped them with their problems to "a very high" or "high" degree. The main finding is five different categories describing the benefits: enhanced psychological health, enhanced physical health, increased awareness of the mind-body connection, support for personal growth, and self-initiated life changes. CONCLUSIONS: Most RMB clients in this study indicated satisfaction with the treatment. The perceived benefits were found to be related to five separate categories. However, the results of this exploratory study cannot be generalized to a target population or to any conclusions about causality, as there is reason to assume that clients with positive experiences were overrepresented in the study population, due to the selection procedure. The results indicate that an analysis focusing on the interaction between client and therapist from a nursing theoretical perspective may increase the knowledge about mechanisms that create perceived benefits, since several aspects of the therapy seem to be related to high-quality nursing.
Authors: Wolf E Mehling; Judith Wrubel; Jennifer J Daubenmier; Cynthia J Price; Catherine E Kerr; Theresa Silow; Viranjini Gopisetty; Anita L Stewart Journal: Philos Ethics Humanit Med Date: 2011-04-07 Impact factor: 2.464