Healing touch is an energy-based therapeutic approach to healing (Poznanski-Hutchinson, 1999; Mentgen, 1996). Healing touch uses touch to influence the body’s energy system, thus affecting physical, emotional, mental, and spiritual health and healing (Mentgen, 2001). The goal of healing touch is to restore balance in clients’ energy systems, thereby placing clients in a position to self-heal.
Mentgen, J. (1996). The clinical practice of healing touch. Imprint, 43, 33–36.
Mentgen, J. (2001). Healing touch. Holistic Nursing Care, 36, 143–157.
Poznanski-Hutchinson, C. (1999). Healing touch: An energetic approach. American Journal of Nursing, 99, 43–48.
Gonella, S., Garrino, L., & Dimonte, V. (2014). Biofield therapies and cancer-related symptoms: A review. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing, 18, 568–576.
PHASE OF CARE: Active antitumor treatment
APPLICATIONS: Palliative care
Interventions considered to be BT were healing touch, Reiki, and therapeutic touch. The effect on pain was examined in seven studies. There were some mixed findings, but most showed a reduction in pain over short time periods. Fatigue was assessed in five studies. These demonstrated fatigue reduction post-treatment, but data were conflicting over a longer period of four to eight weeks. Anxiety and depression were examined in seven studies. All but one found a significant reduction in mood disorders, but a study comparing Reiki, sham Reiki, and usual care found no difference between the sham and actual Reiki groups. Most studies were of descriptive or quasi-experimental design; potential confounding variables were not examined, and placebo effects could not be ruled out.
Studies using biofield therapies for relief of pain, anxiety, fatigue, and depression generally showed benefit; however, the evidence is not strong due to the limitations of the studies included.
Low-quality design studies and the short duration of study follow-up
BT therapies have not demonstrated effectiveness in well-designed clinical studies; however, though it is weak, evidence suggests potential benefit. There were no adverse effects of these interventions reported. Biofield therapies are not expensive and are low-risk, so they can be considered in the management of cancer-related symptoms. Well-designed clinical trials are needed to establish efficacy.
Lutgendorf, S.K., Mullen-Houser, E., Russell, D., Degeest, K., Jacobson, G., Hart, L., . . . Lubaroff, D.M. (2010). Preservation of immune function in cervical cancer patients during chemoradiation using a novel integrative approach. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 24, 1231–1240.
To examine the effects of healing touch on natural killer (NK) cell activity, mood, and specific clinical and quality-of-life outcomes among women receiving chemoradiation for locally advanced cervical cancer
After consent, patients randomized to one of three treatment arms: healing touch, relaxation, and control (usual care). The healing touch and relaxation interventions were administered individually four days per week throughout chemoradiation, on nonchemotherapy days, immediately following radiation. Healing touch participants received on average 15.25 (±6.97) sessions versus 11.75 (±5.20) sessions for relaxation (p = 0.08). Psychosocial surveys were completed for a total of four assessments (including baseline) over six weeks of chemoradiation. Each healing touch or relaxation session lasted 20–30 minutes and was delivered by experienced practitioners.
Active treatment
Prospective, randomized clinical trial with repeated measures
Results indicate that, in patients with cervical cancer who are undergoing chemoradiation, healing touch may be effective in preventing some aspects of decreased immunity and reducing depressed mood.
Complementary interventions may be an important adjunct for patients during active treatment, in both improving depressed mood as well as maintaining immunocompetence. However, the intervention must be feasible and acceptable to patients. This very well-reported study took five years to accrue a final sample of 51 patients (fewer than one patient per month), which illustrates the complexity of performing such research.
Post-White, J., Kinney, M. E., Savik, K., Gau, J. B., Wilcox, C., & Lerner, I. (2003). Therapeutic massage and healing touch improve symptoms in cancer. Integrative Cancer Therapies, 2, 332–344.
All participants received four weekly 45-minute sessions of therapeutic massage (MT), healing touch (HT), or presence (P) and four weekly sessions of a standard care control. Credentialed practitioners who were also registered nurses delivered MT and HT. The three interventions all included music, a centering message, and a message to focus on breathing and letting go of extraneous thoughts. The order of the conditions was randomized. MT included a written Swedish massage protocol using massage gel. For HT, the protocol developed by Healing Touch International was used, and touch and nontouch techniques were used. Energy techniques used included centering, unruffling, magnetic unruffling, full-body connection, mind clearing, chelation, and lymphatic drain to modulate the energy field. For P, participants lied on a table listening to relaxing music. An MT or HT therapist sat with the participant during the session. The purpose was to be attentive and caring but to avoid therapy or physical intervention. In the control group, symptoms and vital signs were assessed.
Patients were from two outpatient chemotherapy clinics in the Midwest.
Patients were undergoing the active treatment phase of care.
This was a randomized, two-period crossover (between one of the interventions and standard care) study.
Compared to the control group, there was no effect of presence on fatigue. When comparing individual interventions to their matched control periods, the effect of MT on fatigue was close to significance (p = 0.057). HT was found to reduce fatigue (p = 0.028).
There was no clear evidence that one intervention was superior to the other, but MT and HT seemed to be more effective than presence alone or standard care in improving fatigue.