I’m excited to say that a new piece of research is out: “supporting the efficacy of the Lightning Process for many participants with fatigue, physical function, pain, anxiety and depression.”
The Lightning Process Head office have been working incredibly hard to get even more research behind the LP, as a way of demonstrating its potential for helping people to move past health issues. So this is a huge milestone – as anyone who has been involved in research will know, research takes a lot of time, investment and dedication and the team at Head Office have, and will, continue to plug away at it.
So much more needs to be done to get the Lightning Process recognised for the true potential it has in helping people overcome their health issues, but hopefully this will be the start of more widespread awareness, and of course more lives changed for the better.
An outline is provided below – but for the full article please visit Science Direct.
A systematic review of the evidence base for the Lightning Process
Authors: P Parker, J Aston, L de Rijk
- First systematic review into the Lightning Process.
- Found a variance in quality of studies from good to fair and in reported patient outcomes.
- All studies evidenced a level of benefit from the intervention, commonly for majority of participants.
Background: The Lightning Process (LP), a mind-body training programme, has been applied to a range of health problems and disorders. Studies and surveys report a range of outcomes creating a lack of clarity about the efficacy of the intervention.
Objective: This systematic review evaluates the methodological quality of existing studies on the LP and collates and reviews its reported efficacy.
Data sources: Five databases, PsycINFO, PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, ERIC (to September 2018), and Google and Google Scholar were searched for relevant studies.
Study Selection: Studies of the LP in clinical populations published in peer-reviewed journals or in grey literature were selected. Reviews, editorial articles and studies/surveys with un-reported methodology were excluded.
Data extraction: Searches returned 568 records, 21 were retrieved in full text of which 14 fulfilled the inclusion criteria (ten quantitative studies/surveys and four qualitative studies).
Data synthesis and Conclusions: The review identified variance in the quality of studies across time; earlier studies demonstrated a lack of control groups, a lack of clarity of aspects of the methodology and potential sampling bias. Although it found a variance in reported patient outcomes, the review also identified an emerging body of evidence supporting the efficacy of the LP for many participants with fatigue, physical function, pain, anxiety and depression. It concludes that there is a need for more randomised controlled trials to evaluate if these positive outcomes can be replicated and generalised to larger populations.