Massage therapy for cancer palliation and supportive care: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials
- 2.2k Downloads
Massage is a popular adjunct to cancer palliation. This systematic review is aimed at critically evaluating all available randomised clinical trials of massage in cancer palliation.
Materials and methods
Six databases were searched to identify all trials of classical massage for cancer patients. Studies of other types of massage, e.g. reflexology, aromatherapy, were excluded. Fourteen trials met all inclusion criteria.
Collectively, they suggest that massage can alleviate a wide range of symptoms: pain, nausea, anxiety, depression, anger, stress and fatigue. However, the methodological quality of the included studies was poor, a fact that prevents definitive conclusions.
The evidence is, therefore, encouraging but not compelling. The subject seems to warrant further investigations which avoid the limitations of previous studies.
KeywordsMassage Effectiveness Systematic review Cancer palliation Alternative medicine
I am indebted to Kate Boddy for conducting the electronic literature searches.
- 1.Ernst E, Pittler MH, Wider B, Boddy K (2006) The desktop guide to complementary and alternative medicine, 2nd edn. Elsevier Mosby, EdinburghGoogle Scholar
- 14.Segen JC (1998) Dictionary of alternative medicine. Appleton and Lange, Stamford, ConnecticutGoogle Scholar
- 24.Wilkie DJ, Kampbell J, Cutshall S, Halabisky H, Harmon H, Johnson LP et al (2000) Effects of massage on pain intensity, analgesics and quality of life in patients with cancer pain: a pilot study of a randomized clinical trial conducted within hospice care delivery. Hosp J 15(3):31–53 doi:10.1300/J011v15n03_03 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Corner J, Cawley N, Hildebrand S (1995) An evaluation of the use of massage and essential oils in the wellbeing of cancer patients. Int J Palliat Nurs 1:67–73Google Scholar
- 34.Ernst E (2002) Evidence-based massage therapy: a contradiction in terms? In: Jewell Rich G. (ed) Massage therapy the evidence for practice. Mosby, London, pp 11–25Google Scholar