Jain, S., & Mills, P. J. (2010). Biofield therapies: helpful or full of hype? A best evidence synthesis. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 17, 1–16.
To determine whether biofield therapies affect positive health outcomes and reduce disease symptoms.
Databases searched were PubMed, CINAHL, PyscINFO, and Allied and Complementary Medicine (AMED).
Search keywords were spiritual healing, subtle energy, energy healing, biofield healing, external qi therapy, emitted chi, emitted qi, qi therapy, Johrei, pranic healing, polarity therapy, Reiki, therapeutic touch, and healing touch. Investigators also manually searched the reference sections of studies and review papers.
Studies were included if they
Studies were excluded if they related to distant healing or intercessory prayer; integrated modalities that were not biofield-based modalities with biofield-based modalities in such a way that the interventions could not be separated; were animal, plant, and/or in vitro studies; were clinical studies with group assignment but without randomization; were purely descriptive studies; or were unpublished dissertations.
Patients were undergoing the active treatment phase of care.
The authors presented results according to type of patient and levels of evidence.
Proximally practiced biofield therapies are promising complementary interventions as means of reducing pain intensity in multiple populations, reducing anxiety in hospitalized populations, and reducing agitated behaviors in patients with dementia. The long-term effects of the therapies on fatigue and autonomic nervous system activity are unclear.
Future research should compare biofield therapies with empirically supported treatments for specific conditions.