Tsang, K.L., Carlson, L.E., & Olson, K. (2007). Pilot crossover trial of Reiki versus rest for treating cancer-related fatigue. Integrative Cancer Therapies, 6, 25–35.

DOI Link

Intervention Characteristics/Basic Study Process

Interventions were of two conditions:

  1. In the Reiki condition, participants received Reiki for five consecutive daily sessions, a one-week washout period of no treatments, then two additional Reiki sessions, and two weeks of no treatments.
  2. In the rest condition, participants rested for one hour each day for five consecutive days, followed by a one-week washout period of no resting, and an additional week of no treatments.

Sixteen patients participated in the trial; eight were randomized to each order of condition (Reiki then rest; rest then Reiki). All sessions were administered from the same Reiki master.

Sample Characteristics

  • The study reported on a sample of 16 patients (13 women).
  • Median patient age was 59 years.
  • Patients had a variety of cancers, with the most common being colorectal (62.5%). Cancer stage ranged from I through IV.
  • Patients were screened for fatigue (ESAS tiredness item); those scoring > 3 were eligible for the study.

Study Design

The study was a counterbalanced crossover pilot trial of two conditions.

Measurement Instruments/Methods

  • Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy: Fatigue (FACT-F): Questionnaire was completed prior to any intervention; higher scores indicate less fatigue.
  • Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS): A patient-rated visual analog scale (VAS) is used to assess nine symptoms on severity.

Results

There was a statistically significant change between the pre-first treatment and post-seventh treatment. Scores in the Reiki condition for anxiety were t(16) = 3.38, p < 0.005 (measured on the ESAS VAS for anxiety pre and post Reiki or rest). The Reiki condition demonstrated decrease in daily fatigue compared to rest alone.

Conclusions

The study is a well-designed crossover trial with randomization to groups.

Limitations

The study had a very limited sample size.