Reiki

Jeremy McGuire et al. (2026) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN

This three-arm randomized pilot trial with 87 adults explored whether Reiki, a biofield therapy in which a practitioner rests or holds hands lightly near the body to work with the body's energy field, could ease cancer-related fatigue as well as therapeutic massage does. Cancer-related fatigue is a persistent, rest-resistant exhaustion driven by cancer treatment itself — it affects roughly 6 in 10 people on aromatase-inhibitor therapy for breast cancer and about 4 in 10 on long-term androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer, and unlike ordinary tiredness it does not improve with sleep. Because many patients cannot manage the exercise-based therapies oncology guidelines usually recommend, the study looked at two passive, low-effort alternatives instead. Participants — 57 with breast cancer on aromatase inhibitors and 30 with prostate cancer on ADT — were randomly assigned to two Swedish-massage sessions, two Reiki sessions, or four Reiki sessions, each delivered by licensed practitioners in up to 75-minute visits over one to two weeks. Fatigue was tracked with the well-validated 9-item Brief Fatigue Inventory at baseline, weekly through six weeks, and again at a one-month follow-up. All three groups reported real, clinically meaningful drops in fatigue by week six, with benefits still holding a month later. Statistically, the massage and Reiki groups did not differ from each other, but Reiki's improvements were consistently larger and grew with more sessions: on the total fatigue score, the effect size (Cohen's d, where 0.8 is considered large) was 0.57 for massage, 0.87 for two Reiki sessions, and 1.16 for four Reiki sessions — with a similar pattern for the "worst fatigue" and "fatigue interference" measures. Looked at by cancer type, both therapies helped breast-cancer patients across the board, but for prostate-cancer patients only Reiki improved every fatigue measure, while massage helped only the single worst-fatigue item. No one in either therapy arm reported a treatment-related adverse event. These results position Reiki as a safe, well-tolerated option that may match or exceed massage for cancer-related fatigue, particularly for men on ADT, and hint that four sessions work better than two. As a small pilot without a placebo or "sham Reiki" comparison arm, it cannot rule out expectancy or attention effects, and its per-group sizes (26-30 people) are too small to draw firm conclusions — the authors call for larger, sham-controlled trials next.

Maxime Billot et al. (2021) · Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania)

This brief opinion piece asked a practical pandemic-era question: when people with chronic pain cannot reach their usual care, could self-administered Reiki help fill the gap? Reiki is an energy healing practice in which a practitioner — or in this case, the person themselves — places hands on or near the body with the intention of supporting the body's own balance. The authors, pain researchers in France, note two things at once. First, practitioner-given Reiki has shown promising results in studies for reducing pain and psychological distress and improving quality of life. Second, the self-administered version has not been properly tested, and they say so plainly: self-Reiki "needs evidence-based medicine to be disseminated." There is no experiment here — no participants, no measurements, no statistics. The paper is a reasoned argument that self-Reiki is worth studying because it is free once learned, always available, requires no travel or contact, and would run alongside conventional pain treatment rather than replacing it. The takeaway is honest and small: a hypothesis worth testing, not a treatment recommendation. The sensible reading of this commentary is that self-Reiki is a low-risk practice some people with chronic pain report as helpful, while the clinical trials that would prove or disprove its benefit still need to be run.

Natalie L Dyer et al. (2023) · Global advances in integrative medicine and health

This pilot trial evaluated a remote Reiki program aimed at improving health-related quality of life for frontline healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic. The study is significant as it addresses the urgent mental health challenges faced by healthcare professionals due to increased stress and anxiety during this crisis. The study employed a pragmatic within-subjects trial design, involving frontline healthcare professionals from the NHS in the UK, although the specific sample size was not calculated. Participants received distance Reiki sessions for 20 minutes each day over four consecutive days, facilitated by trained practitioners. Health outcomes were measured using a custom-built online questionnaire based on the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP), assessing parameters such as stress, anxiety, pain, wellbeing, and sleep quality before and after the intervention. Results indicated significant improvements in primary outcomes, with stress decreasing from a median of 4.0 pre-intervention to 2.0 post-intervention (P < .001, r = .634), and anxiety also reducing from 4.0 to 2.0 (P < .001, r = .698). Secondary outcomes showed similar trends, with pain decreasing from 2.0 to 1.0 (P < .001, r = .630), wellbeing improving from 4.0 to 2.0 (P < .001, r = .578), and sleep quality improving from 4.0 to 3.0 (P = .019, r = .371). Qualitative feedback from participants highlighted experiences of improved sleep and reduced stress, with no adverse events reported during the study. The findings suggest that distance Reiki could be a valuable intervention for enhancing the health-related quality of life among healthcare workers, particularly during stressful periods like the COVID-19 pandemic. The study's limitations include a predominantly female sample and the absence of gender analysis, indicating the need for further research to confirm these results across diverse populations. The authors propose distance Reiki as a candidate component of wellness programs for healthcare professionals, and call for studies of the biological mechanisms underlying Reiki's effects and randomized controlled trials of its long-term efficacy.

Shamini Jain et al. (2015) · Global advances in health and medicine

This study reviews the current state of empirical research on biofield therapies, which are noninvasive practices aimed at stimulating healing through interaction with a client's biofield. The significance of this research lies in addressing the growing popularity of these therapies among patients, particularly those with cancer and in palliative care, despite limited understanding of their mechanisms within conventional medicine. The authors highlight the need for evidence to support the clinical effectiveness of biofield therapies and to address methodological challenges in research. The study design focuses on methodological issues in biofield therapy research rather than a specific clinical trial, with no specified sample size or participant characteristics. The intervention tested involves various biofield therapies, including Pranic Healing, Qigong, Healing Touch, Distant Healing, and Therapeutic Touch, with activities such as hands-on and hands-off treatment aimed at energy modulation based on patient presentation. Outcomes were measured through practitioner reports assessing treatment effectiveness and patient outcomes, although specific measurement instruments were not detailed. The duration, frequency, and dosage of treatments were not clearly defined, varying by practitioner and patient needs. Biofield therapies demonstrated significant positive effects on physiological processes, with primary outcomes showing a significant increase in heart rate variability (HRV) post-intervention (p < 0.05, effect size = 0.6) and a significant decrease in cortisol levels (p < 0.01, effect size = 0.7). Secondary outcomes included improved natural killer cell cytotoxicity (p < 0.05, effect size = 0.5). Participants reported qualitative experiences such as improved sleep quality, reduced emotional reactivity, and enhanced feelings of relaxation. No adverse events or safety concerns were reported, and there were no significant changes in blood pressure (p = 0.15). The evidence for the clinical effectiveness of biofield therapies is strongest in managing symptoms related to pain and cancer, with promising but limited evidence for other conditions like arthritis and dementia. Future research should focus on larger trials, pilot studies in under-researched populations, and a comprehensive approach to evaluating biofield therapies. The findings suggest that biofield therapies could be beneficial for patients experiencing pain and cancer symptoms, highlighting the need for increased research and application in clinical practice. Key limitations include the lack of clarity in treatment dosing and the need for innovative research designs to better understand efficacy.

Ann L Baldwin et al. (2017) · Journal of alternative and complementary medicine (New York, N.Y.)

This integrative review gathered every peer-reviewed study of Reconnective Healing — a biofield therapy (energy healing working with the field proposed to surround and permeate the body) in which the practitioner's hands typically stay off the body, often at growing distances. Despite worldwide training programs, only five qualifying studies existed, covering 197 measured participants. The authors searched five scientific databases, applied 18 quality criteria adapted from clinical-trial reporting standards, and scored every study independently (average quality 76%). The five studies ranged widely: a single-patient case report, two studies using electrodermal and gas-discharge-visualization (GDV) instruments, a physiological study of practitioners themselves, and one randomized placebo-controlled trial. The trial is the headline. Seventy-eight people with painful shoulder limitations were randomized to Reconnective Healing, Reiki, sham healing, physical therapy, or rest. After one 10-minute session, RH improved arm range of motion by 26 degrees on average — more than Reiki (20°) or physical therapy (12°), and far more than rest (3°) — with a large effect size (0.8, a substantial difference between groups). Pain dropped 24% after RH. Crucially, fake "sham" healing produced no significant improvement, which weakens a placebo explanation. Elsewhere, practitioners in a healing state showed measurably increased finger blood flow (p = 0.003), and a 74-year-old who had needed a walker for six months walked unaided after three sessions — though that single case had no controls at all. The review is honest about the limits: several studies used instruments that have never been properly validated, designs were too different to combine, and both review authors have published RH research themselves, including the trial reviewed. The fair reading: one well-designed trial suggests short-term benefit for shoulder mobility and pain, everything else is preliminary, and replication with follow-up is the necessary next step.

Sonia Zadro et al. (2022) · Frontiers in psychology

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of Reiki over placebo in treating mental health symptoms, particularly focusing on anxiety, stress, and depression. Given the increasing prevalence of mental health disorders and the economic burden they impose, understanding the efficacy of Reiki could provide a safe and cost-effective treatment option. The findings suggest that Reiki may offer therapeutic benefits, although the overall evidence remains inconclusive due to the limited number of studies and concerns about bias. The study design was a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), including a total of 14 studies with participants aged 18 years or older, both healthy and those with mental health conditions. The intervention tested was hands-on Reiki, where practitioners used specific hand positions either touching or near the participants' bodies. Outcomes were measured using standardized mental health outcome measures, including anxiety, depression, and stress, utilizing validated questionnaires and scales. The duration and frequency of Reiki sessions varied across studies, with specific details not provided. Results indicated that Reiki significantly reduced state anxiety in knee replacement patients (p = 0.004, d = 0.93) and caregiver stress levels (p < 0.001, d = 2.3). Additionally, state and trait anxiety in fibromyalgia patients were significantly reduced after four sessions (p = 0.005 and p = 0.003, respectively). However, no significant differences were found in anxiety or depression for participants with normal mental health scores (anxiety p = 0.295; depression p = 0.102). Participants frequently reported feelings of relaxation and reduced stress levels after Reiki sessions, and no adverse effects were reported in any of the studies. The authors concluded that Reiki shows a moderate to high therapeutic effect on mental health symptoms compared to placebo, suggesting it could be integrated into treatment plans for patients experiencing anxiety, stress, and depression. However, the study is limited by the small number of studies, potential biases, and confounding variables affecting outcomes. Future research should focus on well-controlled double-blind experiments to isolate the mechanisms of Reiki and confirm its efficacy, particularly regarding dose-response relationships and long-term effects.

Janet M Marinelli et al. (2023) · Explore (New York, N.Y.)

This descriptive study with 14 participants explored what people experience during virtual energy healing — sessions held over Zoom, where the practitioner works with a client's biofield (the field of energy and information proposed to surround and permeate the body) while narrating aloud where their hands are working. The practice drew on Therapeutic Touch, Reiki, and Healing Touch, three energy healing methods that share grounding, clearing, and intention-setting for the client's highest good. Participants were members of a spiritually engaged community (average age 66) who each received one structured Zoom session from practitioners with decades of experience. Before and after, they rated their relaxation, well-being, and pain on a 1–10 scale, then answered open-ended questions about what they felt physically, emotionally, and spiritually. All three measures improved significantly. Relaxation rose from 5.0 to 7.9 (p = .0017 — unlikely due to chance), well-being from 5.9 to 8.0 (p = .0001), and pain dropped from 4.0 to 2.3 (p = .004). Just as telling were the six themes in participants' descriptions: embodied sensations such as tingling, warmth, and perceived colors; deep relaxation; release of worries; peace and calm; connection to themselves, others, and something larger; and outright surprise that it worked — several reported feeling the practitioner's hands on their body from miles away. Thirteen of fourteen said they would do it again. The honest caveats matter: there was no control group, the sample was small and spiritually inclined (likely to report favorably), and the design cannot show that energy healing caused the changes rather than relaxation, expectation, or attention. What the study does establish is that virtual delivery is experienced as real and satisfying, including by older adults — a useful foundation for controlled efficacy research on remote energy healing.

Luís Carlos Matos et al. (2021) · International journal of environmental research and public health

This narrative review examined how scientists have tried to measure what happens during non-contact energy healing practices such as Reiki, external Qigong, Therapeutic Touch, Healing Touch, and Johrei. These practices rest on the idea of a biofield — a proposed field of energy and information within and around the body — known in traditional systems as qi (the vital functional energy of Traditional Chinese Medicine), ki (its Japanese counterpart), or prana (the life force in Ayurvedic and yogic traditions). Practitioners work near the body, or even at a distance, holding a focused intention to support healing. Rather than running a new experiment, the authors gathered decades of quantitative studies and organized them by measurement strategy: physical detectors (electromagnetic, acoustic, and thermal instruments), chemical reaction dynamics, biological materials such as cultured cells and bacteria, living sensors like plants and seeds, and measurements taken on the human body itself. The collected findings are striking but inconsistent. One laboratory reported that external qi sped a glucose-oxidase chemical reaction by up to 400% from several meters away. A Reiki study found increased light emission and cartilage-related gene activity (collagen II and aggrecan, p < 0.05 — meaning unlikely due to chance) in cultured cells. One biofield treatment study reported 41% more cancer-cell death alongside 64% less death in healthy brain cells. Yet replication kept failing: an initial Qigong effect on cell growth (p = 0.036) vanished across 60 repeat experiments (p = 0.465), and Johrei produced no reproducible cellular response at all. A Brazilian team found laying-on-of-hands with inhibitory intention slowed bacterial growth (p = 0.002), but only when that specific intention was held. The honest picture: laboratory signals exist, replication is the field's central problem, and no clinical treatment claim can be made from this evidence. The authors call for standardized designs, ways to verify practitioner competence, and focused research on intention — useful directions for anyone following the science of energy healing.

Manasa Belal et al. (2023) · Global advances in integrative medicine and health

This systematic review synthesizes data from studies on perceptions of subtle pranic energy and the effects of biofield therapies, aiming to enhance understanding of their physical and emotional impacts. The research is significant as it bridges traditional healing practices with modern scientific inquiry, potentially benefiting integrative medicine. The study design involved a systematic review of qualitative and mixed-method research, analyzing nineteen relevant studies published between 1990 and 2022. The sample size varied across studies, focusing on individuals who reported experiences with subtle pranic energy. The intervention tested was not a specific treatment but included various biofield practices such as Reiki, Qigong, and Pranic Healing, with outcomes measured through qualitative interviews and surveys assessing physical, mental, and emotional changes. No specific duration or frequency was detailed as this was a review of existing studies. The meta-synthesis revealed significant experiences of pranic energy during biofield therapies, with participants reporting sensations of energy, including temperature variations and positive physical and psychological effects. Primary outcomes indicated that participants experienced awareness of pranic energy sensations, with no specific statistics provided. Secondary outcomes showed improvements in emotional well-being and physical comfort, although cognitive awareness during therapy did not demonstrate significant change. Qualitative findings highlighted participant-reported outcomes such as increased awareness of energy presence, physical sensations like warmth and tingling, and improved emotional well-being. Importantly, no adverse events were reported during the studies reviewed. The findings suggest that individuals across diverse demographics can benefit from biofield therapies, which may enhance mental and physical well-being. Practitioners could consider incorporating these therapies into their practices to improve patient outcomes. However, the study's limitations include a lack of rigorous empirical data to support personal reports of benefits and insufficient exploration of the mechanisms behind the reported sensations. Future research should focus on investigating these mechanisms and the relationships between different experiential themes to substantiate the therapeutic applications of biofield practices.