| Literature DB >> 31438638 |
Shu Zhang1,2,3, Liye Zou4, Li-Zhen Chen1,3, Ying Yao1,3, Paul D Loprinzi5, Parco M Siu6, Gao-Xia Wei7,8.
Abstract
Tai Chi Chuan (TCC) as a typical mind-body practice has been investigated for its preventive role on negative emotions and has demonstrated its efficacy in healthy populations. However, the results are not consistent. We performed a meta-analysis and systematically evaluated the effect of TCC on selected negative emotions (i.e., anxiety and depression). Fourteen experimental studies from three English-and two Chinese-language databases were evaluated. The results showed that the positive effects of TCC on negative emotions were moderately to largely significant. In addition, although TCC significantly improved negative emotions in both the young adults and the older adults, old adults benefited more from TCC than young adults. These findings suggest that TCC is a worthy complementary non-pharmacological resource towards depression and anxiety and, thus, has great implications for the public health domain.Entities:
Keywords: Tai Chi Chuan; anxiety; depression; exercise; prevention
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31438638 PMCID: PMC6747200 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16173033
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
The experimental characteristics of all selected trials.
| Studies | Study Area | Study Design | Sample Size (N) | Female (%) | Mean Age (Years) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bao et al. 2015 | China, Mainland | PPCGD 1 | TCC 2: 73; C 3: 69 | TCC: 52.1; C: 52.2 | TCC: 14.8; C: 14.7 |
| Chang et al. 2013 | China, Taipei | QED 4 | TCC: 64; C: 69 | TCC: 53.1; C: 65.2 | TCC: 56.5; C: 62.3 |
| Frith et al. 2011 | Australia | Field study | TCC: 29; C1 (CI 5): 30; C2 (AE 6): 34 | TCC: 62.1; C1: 53.3; C2: 50 | TCC: 37.2; C1: 30; C2: 27.7 |
| Frye et al. 2007 | USA | RCT 7 | TCC: 23; LIE 8: 28; C: 21 | Total: 54 | Total: 69.2 |
| Gallegos et al. 2016 | Spain | RCT | TCC: 68; Y 9: 85; M 10: 84; C: 45 | Total: 54.6 | Total: 20.3 |
| Hong et al. 2017 | China, Mainland | PPCGD | TCC: 60; C: 60 | TCC: 50; C: 50 | NR |
| Li, A et al. 2006 | China, Mainland | PPCGD | TCC: 59; C: 59 | Total: 47.5 | NR |
| Li, F et al. 2001 | USA | RCT | TCC: 40; C: 32 | Total: 75 | Total: 73.2 |
| Liao et al. 2018 | China, Mainland | RCT | TCC: 55; C: 52 | TCC: 65.5; C:57.7 | TCC: 71.84; C: 71.8 |
| Noradechanunt et al. 2017 | Australia | RCT | TCC: 9; Y: 11; C: 10 | TCC: 69.2; Y: 76.9; C: 76.9 | TCC: 67.2; Y: 67.6; C: 65.2 |
| Sattin et al. 2005 | USA | RCT | TCC: 92; WE 11: 82 | TCC: 95; WE: 94 | TCC: 80.4; WE: 80.5 |
| Schitter et al. 2016 | Switzerland | PPCGD | TCC: 28; C: 31 | Total: 66.7 | Total: 35.5 |
| Zhang et al. 2014 | China, Mainland | Five-arm RCT | TCC: 28; Swim 12: 29; Run 13: 27; SD 14: 30; C: 30 | TCC: 53.6; C: 46.7 | TCC: 65.5; C: 64.1 |
| Zheng et al. 2017 | Australia | Three-arm RCT | TCC: 17; Ex 15: 17; C: 16 | TCC: 64.7; Ex: 82.4; C: 87.5 | TCC: 35.4; Ex: 32; C: 34.6 |
1 PPCGD: Pre and post-test control group design; 2 TCC: Taichi Chuan; 3 C: Control; 4 QED: Quasi experimental design; 5 CI: circuit training; 6 AE: aerobic exercise; 7 RCT: random control trial; 8 LIE: low impact exercise; 9 Y: Yoga; 10 M: Mindfulness; 11 WE: Wellness Education; 12 Swim: swimming; 13 Run: running; 14 SD: Square Dancing; 15 Ex: Exercise; NR: not reported.
The intervention characteristics of all selected trials.
| Studies | TCC Style | Weekly Dosage | Duration | Supervisor (Y or N) | Emotion Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bao et al. 2015 | Yang style | 60 min × 5 | 1 year | Y 1 | PHCSCS 3 |
| Chang et al. 2013 | Cheng Style | 60 min × 3 | 12 weeks | Y | BAI 4 |
| Frith et al. 2011 | N/A 5 | 5~10 min × 3 | 5–10 min | Y | TESI 6 VAS 7 |
| Frye et al. 2007 | Yang style | 60 min × 3 | 12 weeks | Y | STAI 8 SAS 9 CES-D 10 |
| Gallegos et al. 2016 | Tsung Hwa/Canneti/Rooting/Chen style (Mixed) | 30 min × 2 | 30 × 2 min | Y | DASS-21 11 |
| Hong et al. 2017 | N/A | 60 min × 4 | 2 months | NR | SCL-90 12 |
| Li, A et al. 2006 | N/A | 30 min × 5 | 15 weeks | NR | SCL-90 |
| Li, F et al. 2001 | Condensed, classical Yang form | 60 min × 2 | 24 weeks | Y | CESD-20 13 PANAS-20 14 PWPD 15 SWLS 16 |
| Liao et al. 2018 | Yang Style | 50 min × 3 | 3 months | N/A | GDS 17 |
| Noradechanunt et al. 2017 | 12 Movement Sun style | 60 min × 2 | 12 weeks | N2 | CES-D |
| Sattin et al. 2005 | N/A | 60~90 min × 2 | 48 weeks | Y | CES-D |
| Schitter et al. 2016 | Yang style | 60 min × 2 | 12 weeks | Y | CES-D ADS-K 18 |
| Zhang et al. 2014 | N/A | 30~60 min × 3 | 18 months | Y | SECF 19 HAMA 20 HAMD 21 |
| Zheng et al. 2017 | Sim-24 | 60 min × 2 | 12 weeks | Y (First 6 weeks) | STAI PSS 22 SF-36 23 |
1 Y: Yes; 2 N: No; 3 PHCSCS: Piers–Harris Children’s Self-Concept Scale; 4 BAI: The Beck Anxiety Inventory; 5 N/A: Not reported; 6 TESI: Tension and Effort Stress Inventory; 7 VAS: A bipolar visual analogue scale; 8 STAI: the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; 9 SAS: Spielberger Anxiety Scale; 10 CES-D: the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale; 11 DASS-21: the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales; 12 SCL-90: Self-reporting Inventory-90; 13 CESD-20: 20-item Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression scale; 14 PANAS-20: the 20-item Positive and Negative Affect Schedule; 15 PWPD: Positive well-being and psychological distress (subscale of the Subjective Exercise Experiences); 16 SWLS: the Satisfaction with life scale; 17 GDS: the Geriatric Depression Scale; 18 ADS-K: Allgemeine Depressionsskala -Kurzform questionnaire; 19 SECF: SECF Cognitive Scale; 20 HAMA: Hamilton Anxiety Scale; 21 HAMD: Hamilton Depression Scale; 22 PSS: The Perceived Stress Scale; 23 SF-36: 36-item short form survey.
Figure 1The detailed process of trial selection.
Study quality assessment of all selected trials.
| Studies | Item 1 1 | Item 2 2 | Item 3 3 | Item 4 4 | Item 5 5 | Item 6 6 | Item 7 7 | Item 8 8 | Item 9 9 | Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bao et al. 2015 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Chang et al. 2013 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Frith et al. 2011 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 4 |
| Frye et al. 2007 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| Gallego et al. 2016 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Hong et al. 2017 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Li, A et al. 2006 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Li, F et al. 2001 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Liao et al. 2018 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 |
| Noradechanunt et al. 2017 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
| Sattin et al. 2005 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| Schitter et al. 2016 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 |
| Zhang et al. 2014 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Zheng et al. 2017 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6 |
Item 1 = specified eligibility criteria; Item 2 = random allocation; Item 3 = concealed allocation; Item 4 = baseline equivalence; Item 5 = assessor blinding; Item 6 = retention rate ≥85%; Item 7 = intention-to-treat analysis for missing data; Item 8 = between-group statistical comparison; and Item 9 = point measure/measure of variability ≥ one key outcome.
Figure 2Funnel plot for negative emotions after removing outliers.
Figure 3Forest plot for negative emotions (CI: circuit training; AE: aerobic exercise).
Figure 4Funnel plot for anxiety after removing outliers.
Figure 5Forest plot for anxiety (CI: circuit training; AE: aerobic exercise).
Figure 6Funnel plot for depression after removing outliers.
Figure 7Forest plot for depression.
Figure 8Forest plot for moderator (age) analysis (CI: circuit training; AE: aerobic exercise).
Figure 9Forest plot for moderator (experimental design) analysis (CI: circuit training; AE: aerobic exercise).