The Efficacy of "Distant Healing": A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials
📄 Original study ↗📌 Appears in:
Plain English Summary
Can healing intentions sent from a distance -- through prayer, Therapeutic Touch, or mental focus -- actually help sick people recover? This landmark review in the Annals of Internal Medicine examined 23 rigorous clinical trials covering nearly 2,800 patients. The result is genuinely surprising: over half the studies found statistically significant positive effects from distant healing. Across well-blinded trials, the overall effect size (a measure of result strength) showed a modest but real-looking positive bump. Therapeutic Touch showed the strongest effects, followed by prayer. Notably, co-author Edzard Ernst later became one of the most vocal critics of alternative medicine -- not a team predisposed to believe. Still, the authors pumped the brakes, noting methodological weaknesses prevented firm conclusions. This review became a key benchmark for later researchers in the ongoing debate over distant healing.
Actual Paper Abstract
Purpose: To conduct a systematic review of the available data on the efficacy of any form of "distant healing" (prayer, mental healing, Therapeutic Touch, or spiritual healing) as treatment for any medical condition.
Data Sources: Studies were identified by an electronic search of the MEDLINE, PsychLIT, EMBASE, CISCOM, and Cochrane Library databases from their inception to the end of 1999 and by contact with researchers in the field.
Study Selection: Studies with the following features were included: random assignment, placebo or other adequate control, publication in peer-reviewed journals, clinical (rather than experimental) investigations, and use of human participants.
Data Extraction: Two investigators independently extracted data on study design, sample size, type of intervention, type of control, direction of effect (supporting or refuting the hypothesis), and nature of the outcomes.
Data Synthesis: A total of 23 trials involving 2774 patients met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Heterogeneity of the studies precluded a formal meta-analysis. Of the trials, 5 examined prayer as the distant healing intervention, 11 assessed noncontact Therapeutic Touch, and 7 examined other forms of distant healing. Of the 23 studies, 13 (57%) yielded statistically significant treatment effects, 9 showed no effect over control interventions, and 1 showed a negative effect.
Conclusions: The methodologic limitations of several studies make it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the efficacy of distant healing. However, given that approximately 57% of trials showed a positive treatment effect, the evidence thus far merits further study.
Research Notes
Landmark early systematic review of distant healing in a major medical journal (Annals of Internal Medicine), providing the quantitative baseline (d = 0.40) against which later meta-analyses by Schmidt, Roe, and Masters would be compared. Co-authored by Edzard Ernst, later known as a prominent CAM critic, lending credibility to the cautiously positive findings. Central to Controversy #5 (distant healing/prayer).
Systematic review of 23 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials (N = 2,774 patients) examining the efficacy of distant healing — prayer, Therapeutic Touch, and other distant healing modalities — for medical conditions. Studies were identified through five databases searched through 1999. Of the 23 trials, 13 (57%) yielded statistically significant positive treatment effects, 9 showed no effect, and 1 showed a negative effect. Average weighted effect sizes were d = 0.25 for prayer (P = 0.009), d = 0.63 for Therapeutic Touch (P = 0.003), and d = 0.38 for other distant healing (P = 0.073). The overall effect size across 16 evaluator-blinded trials was d = 0.40 (P < 0.001). The authors conclude methodological limitations prevent definitive conclusions but the evidence merits further study.
Links
Related Papers
Cited By
- Effects of remote, retroactive intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients with bloodstream infection: randomised controlled trial — Leibovici, Leonard (2001)
- Can We Help Just by Good Intentions? A Meta-Analysis of Experiments on Distant Intention Effects — Schmidt, Stefan (2012)
- Alterations in Random Event Measures Associated with a Healing Practice — Crawford, Cindy C (2003)
- Distant Healing of Surgical Wounds: An Exploratory Study — Schlitz, Marilyn (2012)
- Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP) in Cardiac Bypass Patients: A Multicenter Randomized Trial of Uncertainty and Certainty of Receiving Intercessory Prayer — Benson, Herbert (2006)
Extended By
Companion
- Study of the Therapeutic Effects of Intercessory Prayer (STEP) in Cardiac Bypass Patients: A Multicenter Randomized Trial of Uncertainty and Certainty of Receiving Intercessory Prayer — Benson, Herbert (2006)
- Distant Healing of Surgical Wounds: An Exploratory Study — Schlitz, Marilyn (2012)
- Music, Imagery, Touch, and Prayer as Adjuncts to Interventional Cardiac Care: The Monitoring and Actualisation of Noetic Trainings (MANTRA) II Randomised Study — Krucoff, Mitchell W (2005)
- Integrative Noetic Therapies as Adjuncts to Percutaneous Intervention During Unstable Coronary Syndromes: Monitoring and Actualization of Noetic Training (MANTRA) Feasibility Pilot — Krucoff, Mitchell W (2001)
More in Healing
Effects of Intentionally-Treated Water on Cell Migration of Human Glioblastoma Cells
Water, Wine and the Sacred, An Anthropological View of Substances Altered by Intentioned Awareness, Including Objective and Aesthetic Effects
Transcriptional Changes in Cancer Cells Induced by Exposure to a Healing Method
Infrared Spectra Alteration in Water Proximate to the Palms of Therapeutic Practitioners
Crossing Disciplinary Boundaries: Going Beyond Even Meta-Analysis of Distant Intention Effects
📋 Cite this paper
Astin, John A, Harkness, Elaine, Ernst, Edzard (2000). The Efficacy of "Distant Healing": A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials. Annals of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-132-12-200006200-00008
@article{astin_2000_efficacy,
title = {The Efficacy of "Distant Healing": A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials},
author = {Astin, John A and Harkness, Elaine and Ernst, Edzard},
year = {2000},
journal = {Annals of Internal Medicine},
doi = {10.7326/0003-4819-132-12-200006200-00008},
}