Effect of Forest Therapy on Depression and Anxiety: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Poung-Sik Yeon, Jin-Young Jeon, Myeong-Seo Jung, Gyeong-Min Min, Ga-Yeon Kim, Kyung-Mi Han, Min-Ja Shin, Seong-Hee Jo, Jin-Gun Kim and Won-Sop Shin
Additional contact information
Poung-Sik Yeon: Department of Forest Sciences, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea
Jin-Young Jeon: Graduated Department of Forest Therapy, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea
Myeong-Seo Jung: Graduated Department of Forest Therapy, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea
Gyeong-Min Min: Graduated Department of Forest Therapy, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea
Ga-Yeon Kim: Graduated Department of Forest Therapy, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea
Kyung-Mi Han: Graduated Department of Forest Therapy, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea
Min-Ja Shin: Graduated Department of Forest Therapy, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea
Seong-Hee Jo: National Center for Forest Therapy, Yeongju 36043, Korea
Jin-Gun Kim: Korea Forest Therapy Forum Incorporated Association, Cheongju 28644, Korea
Won-Sop Shin: Department of Forest Sciences, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 28644, Korea

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 23, 1-27

Abstract: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the effects of forest therapy on depression and anxiety using data obtained from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-experimental studies. We searched SCOPUS, PubMed, MEDLINE(EBSCO), Web of science, Embase, Korean Studies Information Service System, Research Information Sharing Service, and DBpia to identify relevant studies published from January 1990 to December 2020 and identified 20 relevant studies for the synthesis. The methodological quality of eligible primary studies was assessed by ROB 2.0 and ROBINS-I. Most primary studies were conducted in the Republic of Korea except for one study in Poland. Overall, forest therapy significantly improved depression (Hedges’s g = 1.133; 95% confidence interval (CI): −1.491 to −0.775) and anxiety (Hedges’s g = 1.715; 95% CI: −2.519 to −0.912). The quality assessment resulted in five RCTs that raised potential concerns in three and high risk in two. Fifteen quasi-experimental studies raised high for nine quasi-experimental studies and moderate for six studies. In conclusion, forest therapy is preventive management and non-pharmacologic treatment to improve depression and anxiety. However, the included studies lacked methodological rigor and required more comprehensive geographic application. Future research needs to determine optimal forest characteristics and systematic activities that can maximize the improvement of depression and anxiety.

Keywords: forest therapy; depression; anxiety; meta-analysis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (9)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12685/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12685/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12685-:d:692892

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().