Introduction: Essential oil (EO) applications via inhalation and/or absorption through the skin—often referred to as aromatherapy—have particular relevance as complementary to cancer treatment and follow-up care. Aromatherapy is of particular interest for controlling symptoms and enhancing the general well-being of people with cancer. This is indicated by the increasing number of empirical studies on this topic. Although numerous reviews have summarized the extensive primary research about aromatherapy and cancer, no review on aromatherapy use targeting women with gynecologic and breast cancers currently exists. Our scoping review aims at giving an overview of the state of research about aromatherapy in this specific target group. By summarizing and describing study characteristics, based on methodological decisions and content, we intend to offer implications for future research, focused on the use of EO in women with gynecologic and breast cancers. Methods: A systematic scoping review was conducted, based on the literature, and using the extension of the PRISMA statement for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The databases PubMed and CINHAHL were searched in a multi-stage, iterative process taking the most relevant terms under consideration, given our research interest and Boolean operators. The included studies were analyzed and summarized through (1) a table matrix including categories of interest and (2) qualitative content analysis. Results: One hundred seventy studies were examined, and 10 were included in this review. They show high heterogeneity in how the term aromatherapy is defined, in content, research design, EO used, application, and outcomes. However, all 10 studies exclusively targeted women with breast cancer in different states of cancer treatment. Conclusions: Challenges of research within this field point to the heterogeneous use and classification of the term aromatherapy, the differentiation of the principle of action of EO, the lack of transparency in how EO are reported and described (e.g., botanical names, company, dosage, mixing ratios), and the need to include subjective perceptions. Ten implications for future research based on these challenges are given.

Dental fear and anxiety (DFA) is known as an immense challenge in oral healthcare, which can result in compromised oral health, pain, and uncomfortable treatment. The objective of this study was to analyze the effect of essential-oil vaporization on acute anxiety of patients in dental practices. Four dental practices used five weekly cycles of vaporization with each scent: Orange (Citrus sinensis), Swiss Pine (Pinus cembra), Good Mood (blended essential oils: Citrus sinensis, Citrus aurantifolia, Citrus limon, Osmanthus fragrance (5%)), Forest Walk (blended essential oils: Abies grandis, Pinus cembra, Myrtus communis c. t. 1,8-cineol, Abies alba, Citrus paradisi, Abies sibirica, Pseudotsuga menziesii, Vetiveria zizanoides), and water. Acute anxiety was the primary outcome (state-trait-anxiety inventory (STAI-S)). Secondary outcomes were trait anxiety (STAI-T), dental anxiety (Kleinknecht dental fear survey), and pain perception in treatment (numeric rating scale). Across all patients (n = 486), STAI-S was slightly higher in the control group (40.7 ± 11.6) than in the intervention groups (38.4 ± 10.5). Post-hoc analyses revealed that the effect is only robust for the subgroup of female patients (n = 296, p = 0.044). We also conducted a post-hoc additional analysis on a subpopulation with an increased level of STAI-T ≥ 42 (n = 131 patients). For this group the difference in acute anxiety between the control group (51.1 ± 11.9, n = 30) vs. the intervention groups (46.8 ± 9.6, n = 118) was significant (T = 4.39, p = 0.0379). The results of the study indicate a promising potential of essential-oil vaporization to alleviate dental anxiety, particularly in the subgroups of patients with a high level of trait anxiety, and particularly in female patients. The calming effects of the essential-oil vaporization were also highlighted by the anecdotical statements of the dental-practice staff. The anxiety-reducing role of essential-oil vaporization alone and as one part of combined techniques to counter DFA should be further explored using multi-perspective methodological approaches in research.

Background: Gynecological cancer(s), including breast cancer patients in aftercare and survivors, need supportive strategies to cope with symptoms that are adapted to their individual needs and circumstances. Aromatherapy has potential to be such strategy, but (qualitative) empirical research taking users’ own views into consideration about the potential and challenge of aromatherapy is lacking.Purpose: The purpose of the study is to gain insights from individualized aromatherapy as a supportive care treatment, regarding their use and evaluation by women with gynecological cancers in aftercare.Methods: We conducted a study with a mixed-methods design, focused on qualitative research. Five essential oil products were given to 18 participants to apply individually over a 4-week period. After the intervention, qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted. Further, we documented and assessed symptomatic burdens of the women (MYMOP2) before and after intervention quantitatively.Results: Aromatherapy was customized by the participants according to their needs. It showed potential for relief of symptomatic burdens — especially nausea, peripheral neuropathy, pain, and sleep. Additionally, opportunities emerged to indirectly affect symptomatic burdens. These developed out of new coping strategies (e.g., sleep routines) or by combining with existing strategies (e.g., meditation). Furthermore, aromatherapy was successfully used to promote well-being and encourage mindfulness.Conclusion: Our findings demonstrated the potential of aromatherapy as a supportive treatment modality that can be used as a kind of toolbox. Challenges, such as individual odor aversions and intolerances, and limitations due to medication or illness should be considered in future aromatherapy research.

Die häusliche Versorgung spielt eine zentrale Rolle in Deutschland und auch die häusliche Intensivversorgung durch spezialisierte Pflegedienstanbieter hat sich zunehmend etabliert. Die mit der Versorgung im Setting Häuslichkeit verbundenen Herausforderungen für die Patientensicherheit werden hierzulande aber noch selten bearbeitet. Vor diesem Hintergrund wurde gefragt, ob es international bereits Handlungsempfehlungen zur Gewährleistung von Patientensicherheit in der häuslichen Versorgung allgemein und in der Intensivversorgung im Speziellen gibt und welche Anregungen sie für einschlägige Initiativen zur Praxisentwicklung in Deutschland bieten können. In Form einer Übersichtsarbeit wurden online zugängliche englischsprachige Dokumente mit Empfehlungscharakter zu diesem Thema systematisch gesammelt und vergleichend nach formalen und inhaltlichen Gesichtspunkten analysiert. Insgesamt ist die Zahl einschlägiger Dokumente gering. Die formal-inhaltliche Analyse von vier einzuschließenden Publikationen – von denen sich keine ausschließlich oder vordergründig auf das Setting der häuslichen Intensivversorgung bezieht – zeigt bei aller Unterschiedlichkeit der Papiere auch Übereinstimmungen, etwa in der Auswahl der bearbeiteten Sicherheitsthemen (insbesondere Kommunikation, Einbindung von Patienten und An- und Zugehörige, Risikoassessment, Medikamentenmanagement, Qualifizierung). Zudem werden Stärken und Schwächen der einzelnen Dokumente deutlich. So fehlt es zuweilen an einem explizierten Sicherheitsverständnis, einer literaturbasierten Themeneinführung oder einer Anpassung der aufgenommenen Empfehlungen an die Spezifika der häuslichen Versorgung. Die Dokumentenanalyse bietet Anregungen zur formalen und inhaltlichen Gestaltung einschlägiger Handlungsempfehlungen für Deutschland als Basis für notwendige Maßnahmen der Praxisentwicklung zur Verbesserung der Patientensicherheit in der häuslichen Versorgung. In recent years there has been a growing trend towards nursing care at home in general as well as towards intensive home care being provided by specialized home care services in Germany. However, resulting challenges for patient safety have rarely been considered. Against this background we aimed to explore whether international recommendations for patient safety in home care in general and in intensive home care in particular already exist and how they can stimulate further practice development in Germany. A review of online English documents containing recommendations for patient safety in intensive home care was conducted. Available documents were analyzed and compared in terms of their form and content. Overall, a small number of relevant documents could be identified. None of these documents exclusively refer to the intensive home care sector. Despite their differences, however, the analysis of four selected documents showed similarities, e. g., regarding specific topics of patient safety (communication, involvement of patients and their relatives, risk assessment, medication management, qualification). Furthermore, strengths and weaknesses of the documents became apparent: e. g., an explicit understanding of patient safety, a literature-based introduction to safety topics or an adaptation of the recommendations to the specific features of home care were occasionally lacking. This document analysis provides interesting input to the formal and content-related development of specific recommendations and to practice development in Germany to improve patient safety in home care.

Background: Long-term care facility employees’ workload escalation intensifies negative risk for (nursing) staff health, residents, and the economy. Workplace health promotion (WHP) has emerged as a vital approach with positive impacts on employee well-being. This Scoping Review focuses on multimodal WHP programs in long-term care facilities, emphasizing barriers, facilitators, and the integration of complementary and integrative medicine (CIM). Methods: Following the PRISMA-ScR guidelines, a systematic search strategy from February to April 2023 in Medline (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), and CINAHL (EBSCOhost) yielded 506 hits. Findings were enriched through semi-structured expert interviews. All data were analyzed with a deductive-inductive qualitative content analysis. Results: Eleven publications met inclusion criteria and eight experts were interviewed based on key topics of the included publications. The integration of the results showed that primary obstacles highlight structural challenges (time, finances, hierarchies) and team dynamics (lack of support, communication issues, low motivation), while effective communication, support from the management, and participatory engagement enhance program success. CIM approaches are not explicitly referenced as such, despite widespread use. Conclusion: An exclusive CIM-focus, with multimodal WHP programs for long-term care facilities is missing and should highlight the necessity of a multimethod approach intervention. While the need for further research about the specific topic of multimodal, CIM-based WHO programs in long-term care facilities – including cross-cultural and international comparisons – is apparent, an appropriate evaluation of complex interventions is challenging given the nature of multimodal WHP programs. A multi-method approach is therefore recommended as standard for further research in this area.

Background: Systematic reviews and metanalyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have provided robust evidence on the health benefits of nature-based therapies in greenspaces. While such approaches are indispensable for advancing knowledge on therapeutic effects, they do not adequately capture the contextual and interpretive dimensions around these interventions. In the field of Traditional, Complementary, and Integrative Medicine (TCIM), patient perspectives, meaning and decision-making processes, as well as complex interactions play a pivotal role. Despite this, they remain insufficiently researched. To bridge this gap, we conduct a metasynthesis of qualitative studies on nature therapies. This synthesis seeks to complement quantitative findings by offering in-depth insights into participants’ lived experiences and the multifaceted subjective effects of these interventions. The metasynthesis is guided by the following research questions: (1) How do nature-based therapies affect the health and well-being of participants? (2) How do participants in nature-based therapies experience and interact with nature and what is relevant to them? Methods: The metasynthesis follows a systematic approach based on the methodological framework developed by Sandelowski and colleagues, comprising of six sequential phases: (1) conceptualization of the qualitative research design, (2) execution of a comprehensive and systematic literature search with subsequent study selection, (3) classification of the findings, (4) synthesis and integration of qualitative findings, (5) assurance of methodological rigor, and (6) transparent reporting of the outcomes. The systematic search for qualitative studies of interest will be carried out using three databases of particular relevance to the research topic: CINAHL (EBSCO), MEDLINE (PubMed, Ovid), and Embase (Ovid). All stages of the process, from phase one through phase six, will be conducted collaboratively by at least two researchers. The protocol is structured in accordance with PRISMA-P guidelines, and the reporting of the metasynthesis will follow the ENTREQ parameters.