Does massage therapy reduce cortisol? A comprehensive quantitative review.
Study Goal
The researchers aimed to quantitatively review massage therapy's effect on cortisol levels and assess whether cortisol reduction is a plausible mechanism for its clinical benefits.
Results Summary
The study found that massage therapy's effect on cortisol is generally very small and statistically insignificant, except for a moderate effect in children based on limited studies. The results suggest cortisol reduction is unlikely to be the cause of massage therapy's benefits for anxiety, depression, or pain.
Population
General population, with a specific mention of children in one analysis.
Effective Dosage
Not specified
Duration
Not specified
Interactions
None mentioned
| Intervention | Direction | Endpoint | Population | Dosage | Impact | Claim # |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
massage therapy (MT) | decrease | cortisol levels | - | - | reduces | #1 |
massage therapy (MT) | decrease | anxiety, depression, and pain | - | - | relief from | #2 |
massage therapy (MT) | decrease | cortisol | - | ds = 0.05-0.30 | small | #3 |
massage therapy (MT) | no change | cortisol | - | - | nonsignificant | #4 |
massage therapy (MT) | decrease | cortisol | children | d = 0.52 | larger | #5 |
massage therapy (MT) | decrease | cortisol | children | - | statistically significant | #6 |
massage therapy (MT) | decrease | cortisol | - | - | generally very small | #7 |
massage therapy (MT) | no change | cortisol | - | - | not statistically distinguishable from zero | #8 |
massage therapy (MT) | decrease | anxiety, depression, and pain | - | - | well-established and statistically larger beneficial effects | #9 |
OBJECTIVES: It is frequently asserted that massage therapy (MT) reduces cortisol levels, and that this mechanism is the cause of MT benefits including relief from anxiety, depression, and pain, but reviews of MT research are not in agreement on the existence or magnitude of such a cortisol reduction effect, or the likelihood that it plays such a causative role. A definitive quantitative review of MT's effect on cortisol would be of value to MT research and practice. METHODS: After first performing a comprehensive literature search and retrieval, we use rigorous and conventional meta-analytic methods for calculating between-groups effect sizes. As a point of comparison, we also replicate an unconventional approach taken by other reviewers, in which MT recipients' within-group cortisol reductions are quantified as a percentage of change, despite the fact that this introduces numerous confounds not addressed by the first approach. RESULTS: Resultant between-groups effect sizes are almost all small (ds = 0.05-0.30) and nonsignificant. The lone exception is MT's multiple-dose effect in children, which is larger (d = 0.52) and statistically significant, but which is based on only three studies and vulnerable to the file-drawer threat. Within-group percentage reductions of cortisol in MT recipients are generally smaller than those found by other reviewers, and are generally inconsistent with the more rigorous between-groups results, which illustrates the unsuitability of this unconventional approach to assessment of treatment effects. CONCLUSIONS: MT's effect on cortisol is generally very small and, in most cases, not statistically distinguishable from zero. As such, it cannot be the cause of MT's well-established and statistically larger beneficial effects on anxiety, depression, and pain. We conclude that other causal mechanisms, which are still to be identified, must be responsible for MT's clinical benefits.