When Science Studies Reiki

There is a growing body of research on Reiki — an “energy-healing” practice — that examines its potential benefits in areas such as stress, pain, fatigue, anxiety, and quality of life. Below is a summary of key findings, strengths, and limitations of the research so far.

What the studies suggest

Here are some of the promising findings:

• A systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs (11 trials, ~661 participants) found that Reiki was associated with a statistically significant improvement in quality of life (standardized mean difference SMD ≈ 0.28) compared to control conditions. BioMed Central+1

  • The subgroup analysis suggested greater effects when Reiki was given ≥ 8 sessions, or sessions of ≥ 60 minutes, or acute interventions of ≤20 min. Directory of Open Access Journals+1

• A meta-analysis focused on anxiety (824 participants) found a significant effect: SMD = –0.82 (95% CI –1.29 to –0.36) indicating reduction in anxiety with Reiki. BioMed Central

• A systematic review of mental health symptoms (14 placebo‐controlled trials) found that Reiki had a greater effect than placebo for clinically relevant levels of stress and depression (GRADE = high) and moderate‐high for clinically relevant anxiety. Frontiers+1

• In cancer patients, systematic reviews show that Reiki may reduce fatigue and pain:

  • Fatigue: A review (5 studies) found reductions in fatigue in cancer patients receiving Reiki. PubMed

  • Pain: A review of 7 studies (572 patients) found that Reiki reduced pain in 5 out of 7 studies in cancer populations. PubMed

• Safety: Reviews note that adverse events are rare or unreported. nhpcanada.org+1

Important limitations & caveats

The evidence is still preliminary and has several caveats:

• Many earlier reviews noted that the trials had methodological flaws: small sample sizes, poor blinding, inadequate control groups, variations in how Reiki was delivered. PubMed+1

• Heterogeneity is high — results vary widely by condition, protocol (duration/frequency of sessions), population (e.g., general vs chronic illness), and outcome measures. For example, in the quality‐of‐life meta‐analysis heterogeneity I² = 65%. BioMed Central+1

• Some outcomes are less well supported: for “normal” (non-clinically elevated) levels of depression/anxiety or stress, the evidence grade is low to moderate. Frontiers

• Mechanistic explanations remain speculative (i.e., how Reiki works physiologically is not well established).

• Reiki should not replace conventional medical treatments, especially for serious conditions.

What does this mean in practice

• If someone is experiencing clinically significant stress, anxiety, depression, or fatigue – particularly in the context of chronic illness or surgery – Reiki may be a useful adjunctive (complimentary) therapy (i.e., in addition to primary care).

• For general wellness or mild symptoms, the evidence is weaker, so expectations should be moderate.

• Because some protocols suggest that more sessions (e.g., ≥8) and adequate duration improve effect, if Reiki is used it may be beneficial to engage with a practitioner for a reasonable course rather than a one-off session.

• Always discuss with one’s healthcare provider if also receiving treatment for serious illness — Reiki could be complementary, but medical care remains primary.

a compact, evidence-focused table of major randomized trials and small controlled studies that have reported benefits from Reiki (pain, anxiety, fatigue, QoL). I pulled primary sources so you can check details yourself — each row has a short takeaway and a citation you can open.

Quick table — key Reiki trials (selected)

Study (year)	Design & n	Population	Intervention vs control	Main outcomes	Takeaway & source
Midilli & Eser (2015)	RCT, n=90 (Reiki vs rest)	Women after cesarean delivery	30 min sessions on postop day 1 & 2 vs rest	Pain intensity (VAS), state anxiety, breathing rate, analgesic use — all reduced in Reiki group (p≤.001)	Shows benefit for acute postop pain/anxiety after cesarean. PubMed
Şişman & Arslan (2023, published 2022 online)	3-arm RCT, n=93 (reiki / sham-reiki / control)	Open abdominal surgery patients	Single perioperative Reiki vs sham Reiki vs none	Surgical fear, anxiety, pain ↓ and oxygen saturation ↑ in Reiki group (between-group differences significant, p<.005)	Suggests Reiki can reduce surgical fear/anxiety vs sham/control. PubMed
Chirico et al. (2017)	RCT, n=110 (Reiki vs control)	Breast cancer patients — pre-surgery phase	Pre-op Reiki vs usual care	Anxiety and mood improved; effect moderated by patient self-efficacy (greater benefits in those with higher self-efficacy)	Reiki reduced pre-surgical anxiety & improved mood; psychological context matters. PubMed
Catlin & Taylor-Ford (2011)	Double-blind RCT (sham Reiki), outpatient chemo infusion (mid-size trial)	Patients receiving chemotherapy	Reiki vs sham-Reiki vs standard care	Both Reiki and sham-Reiki increased comfort/well-being vs standard care (authors note presence/support from RN may influence effect)	Supports higher comfort during chemo — but presence/attention may explain part of effect. PubMed+1
Olson et al. (2003)	Phase II RCT, n=24	Cancer patients with pain on opioids	Standard opioid care + Reiki vs opioid care + rest	Reiki group reported reduced pain (no clear opioid-sparing)	Early small trial suggesting adjunctive pain relief; very small sample. PubMed
Tsang, Carlson & Olson (2007)	Pilot crossover RCT, n=16	Cancer patients with fatigue	5 daily Reiki sessions vs rest (counterbalanced)	Within-session reductions in fatigue and improved energy; no clear between-condition difference across full course	Suggests short-term symptomatic improvements during sessions; small pilot study. SAGE Journals

Short synthesis (what the evidence shows)

• Several randomized studies (above) report reductions in pain, anxiety, surgical fear, fatigue, and improved comfort/well-being or mood after Reiki compared with usual care — including trials that used sham-Reiki controls. PubMed+2PubMed+2

• Systematic reviews/meta-analyses find small-to-moderate pooled effects for anxiety, pain and quality-of-life outcomes but note heterogeneity and methodological limitations across trials (small sizes, variable blinding, different protocols). Two influential overviews: Thrane & Cohen (systematic review/meta-analysis of RCTs) and a 2022 Frontiers review on mental-health symptoms. PMC+1

• Some high-quality trials show both Reiki and sham-Reiki produce benefit compared with usual care (suggesting non-specific factors such as therapeutic presence, relaxation, and attention play a role). Still, several trials report Reiki > sham-Reiki, particularly for clinically significant anxiety/stress. PubMed+1

Limitations to keep in mind

• Many positive trials are small and/or single center; blinding is sometimes incomplete and protocols vary (session length, number, hands on vs off). PMC+1

• Heterogeneity (different outcomes, short vs longer courses) makes pooled estimates imprecise — larger, well-blinded RCTs with standardized protocols are still needed. PMC+1

• Reiki is used as an adjunct (not a replacement) for medical treatment; safety reports show few adverse events, but clinical decisions must prioritize evidence-based care. PMC+1