Conectar
The incidence of psychological distress in patients with malignant tumors is high, which seriously affects the treatment compliance and quality of life of patients and even reduces the survival time. Non-pharmacological interventions are acceptable to patients because of their minor side effects. However, among the numerous interventions, which non-pharmacological intervention has demonstrated the most significant effect is still unclear.
This study aimed to compare the efficacy of different non-pharmacological interventions on psychological distress in patients with malignant tumors.
The databases, including Wanfang databases, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science and Technology Journal Database, SinoMed, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO, were searched systematically for randomized controlled trials on non-pharmacological interventions for psychological distress in patients with malignant tumors that were published up to July 5, 2025. Revman 5.3 and Stata 18.0 were used for paired and network meta-analysis, respectively.
A total of 43 randomized controlled trials were included. The area under the cumulative sorting curve was ranked as Naikan Morita therapy (99.6%) > acceptance and commitment therapy (79.0%) > music therapy (78.3%) > logotherapy (77.8%) > behavioral activation (67.5%) > solution-focused nursing (66.1%) > dignity therapy (51.2%) > mindfulness-based stress reduction (50.6%) > mindfulness-based cognitive therapy (46.7%) > Mika app (39.8%) > psychological education (38.5%) > multi-dimensional collaborative nursing (29.0%) > life review therapy (26.0%) > exercise therapy (14.7%) > usual care (5.0%).
Non-pharmacological interventions had overall benefits in reducing the psychological distress of patients with malignant tumors, especially Naikan Morita therapy, acceptance and commitment therapy, music therapy and logotherapy. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials are still needed to obtain more reliable conclusions.
by Chenyu Zheng, Ming Fang, Yue Zhang, Xinyu Liu, Zhihuan Huang
Exposure to natural landscapes has been shown to affect both physiological and psychological well-being, with the extent of these effects varying across different landscape types. However, the underlying mechanisms remain poorly understood. The association among stress reduction, environments characteristics and individual differences requires further investigation, particularly considering the complexity of landscape attributes and the variability of personal responses. In this study, 98 university students participated in a survey to evaluate the effects of different landscape types on visual preference and fatigue recovery. Physiological data (blood pressure, heart rate), psychological data (Perceived Restorative Scale), and visual preferences were analyzed before and after participants viewed the images of eight representative landscape space types: mountain, field, waterscape, lawn, desert, forest, artificial nature, plant. The results indicated that landscape type significantly influenced both physiological responses and emotional states, as well as participants’ perceived recovery from stress. Among the eight landscape spaces, water features and forests were reported to be the most restorative. Compared to freshmen, juniors exhibited greater improvements in physical and psychological recovery, alongside more positive evaluations of the environments. Notably, the desert landscape elicited varied responses depending on participants’ grade level and gender, suggesting that restoration effects may be modulated by individual characteristics. This may reflect an evolutionary predisposition to prefer natural features that enhance survival. These findings contribute to environmental psychology and provide valuable insights for educational practice and environmental design.
FreshRSS 