11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      An Integrative Review of Scientific Evidence for Reconnective Healing

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Biofield therapies offer a novel, non-invasive approach to treating chronic diseases based on assessing and adjusting an individual's physiological and emotional responses through their bio-energetic field. Reconnective Healing (RH) is defined as: “…not just energy healing, but instead a more comprehensive spectrum of healing composed of energy, light, and information.”

          Objectives: Several biofield therapies, such as Reiki, Therapeutic Touch and Johrei, have already been reviewed in the literature but RH has received little attention even though it is taught and practiced worldwide. This review provides a critical assessment of RH as a healing modality.

          Methods: Scientific research articles published in peer-reviewed journals addressing RH were identified using relevant databases and archives. Information was extracted from each article that met selection criteria for evaluation of quality of reporting and design. This review summarizes and critically evaluates the five currently published peer-reviewed research papers involving RH and assesses whether RH provides consistent physiological outcomes between the studies.

          Results: These results, taken together, suggest: (i) exposure of a healer or healee to RH, either directly or indirectly, amplifies their degree of autonomic arousal and energy, (ii) RH can reduce pain and improve range of motion in people with shoulder limitations, and (iii) when individuals experience RH as a group, their autonomic nervous systems simultaneously show sudden similar responses consistent with the idea that RH is mitigated by entrainment of biofields.

          Conclusions: Since these studies are extremely varied in design it is not possible at this point to reach conclusions about the general effectiveness of RH. More clinical and physiological research performed on different populations under a range of conditions is needed in order to support this healthcare approach.

          Related collections

          Most cited references41

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials.

          The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) statement is used worldwide to improve the reporting of randomized, controlled trials. Schulz and colleagues describe the latest version, CONSORT 2010, which updates the reporting guideline based on new methodological evidence and accumulating experience.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Efficacy, Tolerability, and Dose-Dependent Effects of Opioid Analgesics for Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

            Opioid analgesics are commonly used for low back pain, however, to our knowledge there has been no systematic evaluation of the effect of opioid dose and use of enrichment study design on estimates of treatment effect.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Use of complementary therapies for arthritis among patients of rheumatologists.

              Use of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is common among persons with chronic conditions. To identify correlates of and describe patients' perspective on use of CAM for rheumatologic conditions. Telephone survey. Three university practices and three private rheumatology practices. 232 of 428 eligible consecutive patients (54%) with scheduled appointments. Patients answered questions on CAM use, functional status, pain, provider satisfaction, and health services utilization. Chart reviews provided demographic information and rheumatologic diagnoses. Bivariate analyses identified correlates of four CAM outcomes (history, magnitude, and frequency of CAM use and communication about CAM use with a physician), and multiple logistic regression identified independent correlates of regular CAM use. Approximately two thirds of the respondents (n = 146) had used CAM. Of these 146 respondents, 82 (56%) currently used CAM and 132 (90%) regularly used CAM or had done so in the past. Fifty-five respondents (24%) had used three or more types of CAM. In multivariate analyses, persons who used CAM regularly were more likely to have osteoarthritis (odds ratio, 5.6 [95% CI, 1.9 to 16.8]), severe pain (odds ratio, 2.5 [CI, 1.4 to 4.8]), and a college degree (odds ratio, 2.6 [CI, 1.3 to 5.4]) than patients who had never used CAM. Nearly half of the respondents discussed CAM use with their physicians. The most common reasons for not disclosing CAM use were that the physician had not asked about it and that the patient forgot to tell the physician; fear of disapproval was rarely cited. Discussions about CAM use between patient and physician occurred more frequently among patients with fibromyalgia and persons who regularly used CAM or used several types of CAM. Patients with rheumatologic conditions frequently use CAM. Severe pain and osteoarthritis predict regular use of CAM but do not predict a greater likelihood of discussing CAM use with physicians. Routine inquiry by physicians will probably detect CAM use.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Altern Complement Med
                J Altern Complement Med
                acm
                Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine
                Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. (140 Huguenot Street, 3rd FloorNew Rochelle, NY 10801USA )
                1075-5535
                1557-7708
                01 August 2017
                01 August 2017
                01 August 2017
                : 23
                : 8
                : 590-598
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]Department of Physiology, College of Medicine, University of Arizona , Tucson, AZ.
                [ 2 ]Laboratory for the Advances in Consciousness and Health, Department of Psychology, University of Arizona , Tucson, AZ.
                [ 3 ]Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital Harvard Medical School , Boston, MA.
                Author notes
                Address correspondence to: Ann L. Baldwin, PhD, Department of Physiology, Arizona Health Sciences Center Rm. 4103, 1501 N. Campbell, P.O. Box 245051, Tucson, AZ 85724, E-mail: abaldwin@ 123456u.arizona.edu
                Article
                10.1089/acm.2015.0218
                10.1089/acm.2015.0218
                5628565
                28654301
                984a7264-3ffd-4819-ba3d-2024f2ed0f2e
                © Ann L. Baldwin and Natalie L. Trent, 2017; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.

                This article is available under the Creative Commons License CC-BY-NC ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0). This license permits non-commercial use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Permission only needs to be obtained for commercial use and can be done via RightsLink.

                History
                Page count
                Tables: 2, References: 49, Pages: 9
                Categories
                Reviews

                reconnective healing,biofield therapy,complementary and alternative medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article