Abstract / Summary
Background: Nurses working in intensive care units (ICU) are at high risk for stress and anxiety. Aromatherapy stands out as a non-pharmacological and easily implementable complementary approach for alleviating these symptoms. To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review specifically examining the effects of aromatherapy on stress and anxiety among ICU nurses.
Aims: This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effects of aromatherapy on stress and anxiety among ICU nurses and to assess the methodological quality of the evidence.
Study design: In this systematic review, a literature search was conducted in the Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases without any time restrictions. The review includes randomised controlled, experimental and quasi-experimental studies evaluating the effects of aromatherapy interventions on stress and/or anxiety among ICU nurses. The selection of studies, data extraction and assessment of methodological quality were conducted independently by two researchers.
Results: This systematic review included five studies involving a total of 254 participants. Two of these studies are randomised controlled trials, and three are quasi-experimental studies. The studies included in the review demonstrate that aromatherapy is administered using various essential oils and application methods (inhalation, topical application, etc.). The findings suggest that aromatherapy interventions may reduce stress among ICU nurses, whereas evidence regarding anxiety reduction is mixed and less consistent across studies.
Conclusion: Aromatherapy may have potential benefits for reducing stress among ICU nurses, whereas evidence for anxiety reduction remains limited and inconsistent. Further high-quality studies are needed before firm conclusions or routine clinical implementation can be recommended.
Relevance to clinical practice: Aromatherapy may be considered as an optional supportive intervention within staff well-being programs, provided that safety, scent sensitivity, infection-control procedures and individual preferences are taken into account. However, standardised protocols and further high-quality evidence are required to support its routine clinical use.