Spiritual healing as a therapy for chronic pain: a randomized, clinical trial

Abstract

Spiritual healing is a popular complementary and alternative therapy; in the UK almost 13000 members are registered in nine separate healing organisations. The present randomized clinical trial was designed to investigate the efficacy of healing in the treatment of chronic pain. One hundred and twenty patients suffering from chronic pain, predominantly of neuropathic and nociceptive origin resistant to conventional treatments, were recruited from a Pain Management Clinic. The trial had two parts: face-to-face healing or simulated face-to-face healing for 30 min per week for 8 weeks (part I); and distant healing or no healing for 30 min per week for 8 weeks (part II). The McGill Pain Questionnaire was pre-defined as the primary outcome measure, and sample size was calculated to detect a difference of 8 units on the total pain rating index of this instrument after 8 weeks of healing. VASs for pain, SF36, HAD scale, MYMOP and patient subjective experiences at week 8 were employed as secondary outcome measures. Data from all patients who reached the pre-defined mid-point of 4 weeks (50 subjects in part I and 55 subjects in part II) were included in the analysis. Two baseline measurements of outcome measures were made, 3 weeks apart, and no significant differences were observed between them. After eight sessions there were significant decreases from baseline in McGill Pain Questionnaire total pain rating index score for both groups in part I and for the control group in part II. However, there were no statistically significant differences between healing and control groups in either part. In part I the primary outcome measure decreased from 32.8 (95% CI 28.5-37.0) to 23.3 (16.8-29.7) in the healing group and from 33.1 (27.2-38.9) to 26.1 (19.3-32.9) in the simulated healing group. In part II it changed from 29.6 (24.8-34.4) to 24.0 (18.7-29.4) in the distant healing group and from 31.0 (25.8-36.2) to 21.0 (15.7-26.2) in the no healing group. Subjects in healing groups in both parts I and II reported significantly more 'unusual experiences' during the sessions, but the clinical relevance of this is unclear. It was concluded that a specific effect of face-to-face or distant healing on chronic pain could not be demonstrated over eight treatment sessions in these patients.

Is energy healing an effective non-pharmacological therapy for improving symptom management of chronic illnesses? A systematic review

“…It has been suggested that RCTs alone may not be the ideal design for assessing healing effects [50]. Blinding procedures may dilute healing effects by creating uncertainty between patients and healers, nor does it produce ecological validity that is consistent with real life practice interactions between healers and their subjects [34,42,50]. Further, the use of disease specific outcomes does not capture the broader impact of healing and is antithetical to the approach of healers who focus on the whole person [4].…”

“…Seven energy healing studies adequately assessed for belief or expectancy effects [12,34,35,38,39,42,46]. In two energy healing studies, participants were divided into two groups whereby one group were informed they would receive energy healing at a distance whilst the other group remained blinded to treatment condition [42,46].…”

“…In a second study participants were first randomly allocated to distance healing or proximal healing groups. In the proximal healing group, participants were then randomly assigned to either healing or sham healing whilst those in the distance healing group were assigned to either receive distance healing or to receive no healing [34]. A third distance healing study randomly allocated participants to treatment or waitlist control groups.…”

“…[12]. Belief in the effectiveness of healing was not significantly associated with positive outcomes for adults with chronic pain or arthritis [34,46]. Health related quality of life was not significantly associated with belief in group allocation in one study [38].…”

Pain, Spirituality, and Meaning Making: What Can We Learn from the Literature?

“…Expectation may be responsible for the results of the study by Abbot, Harkness, Stevinson, Marshall, Conn, and Ernst [69] in which they recruited 120 patients from a pain management clinic with at least a six month duration of frequent or persistent pain who were open to a trial method of healing. They randomly assigned them to a group with a healer who reported success in healing patients or a volunteer who only simulated healing by counting backwards.…”