English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Light therapy and the effects on biological function have been known and investigated for decades. Light therapy is used to compensate for the lack of exposure to sunlight, which is thought to be linked to major depressive disorder with seasonal patterns. It is applied as sessions with bright light mimicking natural sunlight. Lack of bright light during daytime is not the only factor to maintain the circadian rhythm, also lack of exposure to bright light at night is important. A new modality called naturalistic light shows promise, mimicking daylight by dynamically changing intensity and wavelengths throughout the day. Evidence of clinical effects, besides bright light effects on depression, is still limited, especially in hospital populations, and present review aims to extract results of the effect of any optical light intervention on hospitalized patients. Through database search, 29 trials were included, of which 8 trials used a variation of naturalistic light. Trials were heterogeneous regarding designs, populations, interventions, methods and outcomes. In 14 out of 17 studies investigating sleep duration, quality and circadian alignment, along with decreased fatigue and improved mood in daytime, light therapy had a significant effect. Circadian rhythm and rhythmicity were affected as well. The effect on mood and cognition was inconsistent across studies. Trials showed more significant outcomes when conducted in non-intensive care units and with duration &gt;5 days. Lux was reported in and compared across 24 studies and did not appear to be correlated to outcome, rather the distribution of wavelengths should be considered when conducting trials in the future. Of the 8 trials investigating naturalistic light, 4 trials had significant outcomes and 3 had adverse outcomes compared to one in the standard light regime. The overall effect of light therapy is beneficial, but evidence for the effect of naturalistic light is still insufficient to be recommended before other modalities. Future research in this area should be conducted in facilities where naturalistic light is installed, with a focus on the spectral distribution.

Clinical outcomes of light therapy in hospitalized patients – A systematic review