Therapeutic Touch

Therapeutic touch (commonly shortened to "TT"), known by some as "non-contact therapeutic touch" (NCTT), is a pseudoscientific energy therapy which.
Table of contents

What this means is that health and disease are viewed in terms of one all-encompassing philosophy, rather than the scientific approach where specific causes are sought to explain specific diseases. A philosophical basis was the approach taken throughout history until the modern era of scientific medicine, which is only about years old.

Understanding Therapeutic Touch

An example of a philosophy of medicine which is no longer practiced is the humoral philosophy. This philosophy held that health was maintained by a balance of four bodily humors: Illness resulted when the four humors were out of balance. Healing was therefore attempted by restoring balance, by either blood letting, or prescribing emetics or cathartics. This philosophy survived for over 2, years in western culture, until its practitioners started subjecting their ideas to scientific analysis.

It is interesting to speculate what would have happened if scientific medicine first took root in the East. Would there now be a movement in China to import western traditional medicine, with proponents calling for more research into the benefits of blood letting? Vitalistic approaches to healing adopt similar philosophies to those of medieval humoral practitioners. The concept of balance, for example, is widely used, probably because it is an easy concept to understand and visualize. For similar reasons, the concept of blockage of energy flow, and restoring flow is also widely used.

Practitioners of traditional Chinese medicine, therefore, attempt to restore the balance of the Yin and Yang and improve the flow of Chi usually through acupuncture. Straight chiropractors attempt to restore the flow of innate intelligence with spinal manipulation. Connected to the concept of restoring balance and flow to the vital force is that of self-healing.

Many alternative philosophies of medicine rely heavily upon the concept that the body has an unlimited, or nearly unlimited, capacity for self-healing. Therefore, as long as their is proper flow and balance, the body can maintain itself in perfect health. All disease, therefore, must result from a loss of this unlimited self-healing capacity, which can only be explained on the basis of blocked flow or disrupted balance.

There is no evidence, however, for the concept of unlimited capacity for self healing. The body can, of course, heal itself to some degree. Our immune systems can fight off infections, our tissues are self-regenerating to a degree, our bodies can heal wounds, and compensate for disease. For these reasons, most of the day-to-day minor symptoms and illnesses we develop do get better on their own. This capacity for self-healing, however, has definite limits. Sometimes, the infecting organisms win the battle against our immune systems resulting in death or significant permanent damage.

Some diseases are caused by genetic or biochemical problems that cannot fix themselves. And, as we all know, our bodies progressively wear out under the strain of time. Eventually, we will all die of something. Therapeutic Touch TT has its philosophical roots deeply imbedded in the ancient and common concepts described above. The HEF is just a modern name for the old superstition of a vital life force.

In a TT grant proposal to study the effects of TT on burn victims, the grant authors described TT as "based on the assumption of a human energy field which extends beyond the skin. Typical TT sessions involve moving the hands about inches above the body. Practitioners claim that they can feel the HEF in this way, and it is often described as being rubbery or electric in feel.

And finally there is "energy transfer" whereby the practitioner transfers energy from their own field to support that of the patient, who is depleted due to their illness. Most TT is practiced by nurses who have undergone special training, which involves learning to sense the HEF. TT is taught in some nursing schools, and any nurse can get continuing education credits for taking classes or seminars in TT. In this way TT has been accepted and legitimized by the nursing profession. Their scientific and rational arguments, however, have been countered by the powerful political clout of TT, which was introduced into nursing at a time when the profession was searching for a new level of respect and independence, one which they rightly deserve as health care professionals.

Most studies indicate that therapeutic touch can relieve tension headaches and reduce pain, such as pain associated with burns, osteoarthritis, or following surgery. It may also speed wound healing and improve function in those with arthritis. In fact, studies show that therapeutic touch stimulates cell growth. Therapeutic touch also promotes relaxation. Cancer, heart disease, and burn patients have reported that therapeutic touch significantly reduces their anxiety.

Generally, the deep relaxation associated with therapeutic touch reduces stress, lowers blood pressure, and improves breathing. Being relaxed may also help lower cholesterol levels and improve immune and bowel functions. Difficult pregnancies may also be made a little easier with the help of therapeutic touch. Together with medical treatment, therapeutic touch can help with many additional conditions, including:.

Some people say that they feel emotional and spiritual changes after receiving therapeutic touch. These may include greater self-confidence, self-control, and self-understanding. There is still controversy, however, as to whether the healing power of therapeutic touch has anything to do with the "laying on of hands. You may feel thirsty, lightheaded, and need to urinate.

Lightheadedness generally lasts for 15 minutes after a session, but you may feel thirsty for days. According to some practitioners, if you were flooded with too much energy you might feel increased pain and be irritable, restless, anxious, or even nauseated. Some say that therapeutic touch may also make fevers and active inflammation worse, so it may be best not to have it done when you have either a fever or active inflammation, such as a swollen joint from arthritis.

Some practitioners also believe it should not be done on areas of the body where there is cancer. Some therapeutic touch practitioners recommend that children, the elderly, and very sick people be treated for only a short time. Although there is no actual touching involved, talk with your practitioner about what to expect from a session, particularly if you have been physically or sexually abused in your past.

Most therapeutic touch practitioners are nurses, although some massage therapists, physical therapists, chiropractors, acupuncturists, and others practice therapeutic touch as well. Nurse Healers-Professional Associates International NH-PAI recommends that people look for therapists who practice regularly at least an average of 2 times per week , have at least 5 years of experience, and have completed at least 12 hours of therapeutic touch workshops.

While there seem to be many potential uses for therapeutic touch, particularly for chronically ill people, measuring how effective it is can be very difficult.


  1. Therapeutic touch Information | Mount Sinai - New York?
  2. Infants Crocheted Filet Sacque – Columbia No. 7. Vintage Pattern [Annotated]!
  3. A Close Look at Therapeutic Touch | Complementary and Alternative Medicine | JAMA | JAMA Network;
  4. Office of Health Education and Promotion - Practices.
  5. The Touch of Life;
  6. What is Therapeutic Touch??

As a result, much of the research has been criticized. Better studies may lead to wider acceptance. Healing as a therapy for human disease: J Altern Complement Med.

Biofield therapies in cardiovascular disease management: The efficacy of "distant healing": Therapeutic touch in dementia care. The energetic language of therapeutic touch. A holistic tool for nurse practitioners. Therapeutic touch in the treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome.

We attempted to obtain a full copy of each publication and every additional publication cited in the ones we subsequently collected. During , we continued to monitor the journals most likely to contain material about TT. These methods have enabled us to identify and obtain reports or abstracts , of which deal specifically with TT, mention it incidentally, and 20 discuss TT predecessors.

Ninety-seven other cited items were either nonpublished or were published in obscure media we could not locate. Only 83 of the reports described clinical research or other investigations by their authors. Nine of these studies were not quantitative. At most, only 1 the study by Quinn 14 of the 83 may have demonstrated independent confirmation of any positive study.

To our knowledge, no reported study attempted to test whether a TT practitioner could actually detect an HEF. Of the 74 quantitative studies, 23 were clearly unsupportive. Eight reported no statistically significant results, 16 , 58 , 98 - 3 admitted to having inadequate samples, 22 , 56 , 2 were inconclusive, 11 , and 6 had negative findings. After surveying published research, the panel concluded that "there is not a sufficient body of data, both in quality and quantity, to establish TT as a unique and efficacious healing modality.

The final report to the funding agency noted statistically significant differences in pain and anxiety in 3 of 7 subjective measurements, but there was no difference in the amount of pain medication requested. With little clinical or quantitative research to support the practice of TT, proponents have shifted to qualitative research, which merely compiles anecdotes.

Both TT theory and technique require that an HEF be felt in order to impart any therapeutic benefit to a subject. Thus, the definitive test of TT is not a clinical trial of its alleged therapeutic effects, but a test of whether practitioners can perceive HEFs, which they describe, in print and in our study, with such terms as tingling , pulling , throbbing , hot , cold , spongy , and tactile as taffy.

Therapeutic touch

After doing its own survey, the UCHSC panel declared that no one had "even any ideas about how such research might be conducted. In and , by searching for advertisements and following other leads, 2 of us L. Of those who did not, 1 stated she was not qualified, 2 gave no reason, and 1 agreed but canceled on the day of the test. The reported practice experience of those tested ranged from 1 to 27 years. There were 9 nurses, 7 certified massage therapists, 2 laypersons, 1 chiropractor, 1 medical assistant, and 1 phlebotomist. All but 2 were women, which reflects the sex ratio of the practitioner population.

One nurse had published an article on TT in a journal for nurse practitioners. There were 2 series of tests.

What is the energy field?

In , 15 practitioners were tested at their homes or offices on different days for a period of several months. In , 13 practitioners, including 7 from the first series, were tested in a single day. The test procedures were explained by 1 of the authors E. The first series of tests was conducted when she was 9 years old. The participants were informed that the study would be published as her fourth-grade science-fair project and gave their consent to be tested.

The decision to submit the results to a scientific journal was made several months later, after people who heard about the results encouraged publication.


  • rock in a sock.
  • Understanding Therapeutic Touch - Therapeutic Touch Network Ontario?
  • Navigation menu.
  • What is therapeutic touch??
  • Search form;
  • The Sleep of Reason (Strangers and Brothers Book 10);

    • The second test series was done at the request of a Public Broadcasting Service television producer who had heard about the first study. Participants in the second series were informed that the test would be videotaped for possible broadcast and gave their consent. During each test, the practitioners rested their hands, palms up, on a flat surface, approximately 25 to 30 cm apart. To prevent the experimenter's hands from being seen, a tall, opaque screen with cutouts at its base was placed over the subject's arms, and a cloth towel was attached to the screen and draped over them Figure 1.

    Each subject underwent a set of 10 trials. Before each set, the subject was permitted to "center" or make any other mental preparations deemed necessary. The experimenter flipped a coin to determine which of the subject's hands would be the target. The experimenter then hovered her right hand, palm down, 8 to 10 cm above the target and said, "Okay.

    Each subject was permitted to take as much or as little time as necessary to make each determination. The time spent ranged from 7 to 19 minutes per set of trials. To examine whether air movement or body heat might be detectable by the experimental subjects, preliminary tests were performed on 7 other subjects who had no training or belief in TT.

    Four were children who were unaware of the purpose of the test. Those results indicated that the apparatus prevented tactile cues from reaching the subject. We decided in advance that an individual would "pass" by making 8 or more correct selections and that those passing the test would be retested, although the retest results would not be included in the group analysis. Results for the group as a whole would not be considered positive unless the average score was above 6.

    Before testing, all participants said they could use TT to significant therapeutic advantage. Each described sensory cues they used to assess and manipulate the HEF. All participants but 1 certified massage therapist expressed high confidence in their TT abilities, and even the aforementioned certified massage therapist said afterward that she felt she had passed the test to her own satisfaction.

    The number of correct choices ranged from 2 to 8. Only 1 subject scored 8, and that same subject scored only 6 on the retest. After each set of trials, the results were discussed with the participant. Because all but 1 of the trials could have been considered a failure, the participants usually chose to discuss possible explanations for failure. Their rationalizations included the following: However, the first attempts 7 correct and 8 incorrect scored no better than the rest.

    Moreover, practitioners should be able to tell whether a field they are sensing is "fresh. Moreover, practitioners customarily use both hands to assess. Each subject could be given an example of the experimenter hovering her hand above each of theirs and told which hand it is. Since the effects of the HEF are described in unsubtle terms, such a procedure should not be necessary, but including it would remove a possible post hoc objection.

    Therefore, we did so in the follow-up testing. This contradicts the fundamental premise of TT, since the experimenter's role is analogous to that of a patient. Only the practitioner's intentionality and preparation centering are theoretically necessary.

    What does a treatment look like?

    If not so, the early experiments on relatively uninvolved subjects, such as infants and barley seeds , cited frequently by TT advocates, must also be discounted. This explanation clashes with TT's basic premise that practitioners can sense and manipulate the HEF with their hands during sessions that typically last 20 to 30 minutes.

    If practitioners become insensitive after only brief testing, the TT hypothesis is untestable. Those who made this complaint did so after they knew the results, not before. Moreover, only 7 of the 15 first trials produced correct responses. The testing was completed in 1 day and videotaped by a professional film crew. Each subject was allowed to "feel" the investigator's energy field and choose which hand the investigator would use for testing. Seven subjects chose her left hand, and 6 chose her right hand.

    The test results were similar to those of the first series.

    Therapeutic Touch

    The number of correct answers ranged from 1 to 7. However, we do not believe that the situation was more stressful or distracting than the settings in which many hospital nurses practice TT eg, intensive care units. Figure 2 shows the distribution of test results. Our alternative hypothesis was that the subjects would perform at better than chance levels. The t statistic of our data did not exceed the upper critical limit of the Student t distribution Table 2. Therefore, the null hypothesis cannot be rejected at the.

    Our data also showed that if the practitioners could reliably detect an HEF 2 of 3 times, then the probability that either test missed such an effect would be less than. If the practitioners' true detection rate was 3 of 4, then the probability that our experiment missed it would be less than 3 in However, if TT theory is correct, practitioners should always be able to sense the energy field of their patients. We would also expect accuracy to increase with experience. We conclude on both statistical and logical grounds that TT practitioners have no such ability.

    Practitioners of TT are generally reluctant to be tested by people who are not proponents. Although more than American practitioners claim to have such an ability, only 1 person attempted the demonstration. We suspect that the present authors were able to secure the cooperation of 21 practitioners because the person conducting the test was a child who displayed no skepticism.

    Therapeutic touch is grounded on the concept that people have an energy field that is readily detectable and modifiable by TT practitioners. However, this study found that 21 experienced practitioners, when blinded, were unable to tell which of their hands was in the experimenter's energy field. The mean correct score for the 28 sets of 10 tests was 4.

    To our knowledge, no other objective, quantitative study involving more than a few TT practitioners has been published, and no well-designed study demonstrates any health benefit from TT. These facts, together with our experimental findings, suggest that TT claims are groundless and that further use of TT by health professionals is unjustified. Draped towel prevents peeking.