Reiki Before Gallbladder Surgery: What One Randomized Trial Can and Cannot Tell Us

Key Takeaways

A three-group randomized trial of 48 patients reported lower fear and anxiety scores after a preoperative Reiki intervention, but one small study cannot establish a universal result.
The study examined self-reported surgical fear and anxiety around elective laparoscopic gallbladder surgery; it did not test whether Reiki treats gallbladder disease or replaces surgery.
Reiki should be discussed as a complementary practice, while diagnosis, treatment, medication, and surgical decisions remain with qualified healthcare professionals.

Key Terms Explained

靈氣 (Reiki) / Reiki — a Japanese complementary practice commonly involving light touch or hands held above the body.
師範 (Shihan) / Teacher or Master — a person authorized within a Reiki lineage to teach and pass on the practice.
臼井式 (Usui-shiki) / Usui Method — a form of practice associated with Mikao Usui and the Japanese Reiki tradition.

My First Encounter With Reiki as a Practical Person

In my own experience, I did not come to Reiki through the spiritual world. The person who first told me about it was already successful in business and getting practical results in ordinary life. That mattered to me because I was more interested in what people actually did than in a dramatic promise.

I later trained in the traditional Japanese Usui stream and became a Reiki Shihan (師範 / Teacher). That background gives me a personal relationship with the practice, but it does not make me a medical researcher. When I read a clinical trial, I try to keep personal experience, the study's measured results, and medical decisions in separate boxes.

This distinction is especially important when the subject is surgery. A person may value a quiet complementary practice while also following the surgeon's instructions, taking prescribed medicine, and asking the hospital team about anxiety. These actions do not compete with one another unless someone wrongly presents Reiki as a replacement.

Related: How Distant Reiki Works — and Why I Never Send It Uninvited explains this in detail.

The Trial in Plain Language

The study was published in the Journal of Holistic Nursing and is indexed in PubMed as PMID 40151965. It included 48 adults undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, a minimally invasive operation to remove the gallbladder. Recruitment took place at a university hospital between November 2022 and December 2023.

Participants were assigned to three groups: Reiki, sham Reiki, and a control group. A sham group is important because it attempts to separate the specific intervention from effects that may come from attention, expectation, time, and a calm encounter. The researchers measured surgical fear and anxiety before and after the assigned procedure.

The abstract reports that fear and anxiety scores in the Reiki group were lower, both within that group and in comparison with the other groups, with statistical significance reported at p below 0.05. This is the result of this sample under this study's conditions. It should not be rewritten as “Reiki works for every surgical patient.”

Related: When Someone Asks Me to Teach Them Reiki: The Questions I Ask Before Saying Yes explains this in detail.

What the study measured

The outcomes were scores from questionnaires about surgical fear and surgical anxiety. These are meaningful experiences for patients, but they are not the same as the medical success of an operation. The study did not show that Reiki removed gallstones, treated infection, changed the need for surgery, or replaced anesthesia and clinical monitoring.

What randomized means

Random assignment reduces the chance that researchers deliberately place certain people in one group. It strengthens a comparison, but it does not remove every possible source of bias. The size of the sample, the way blinding was performed, the setting, participant expectations, and the details of the intervention still matter.

What the Study Cannot Establish

Forty-eight participants make this a limited study. Small samples can detect a result, but estimates may be less stable and may not apply to people in different hospitals, countries, age groups, or medical situations. Replication by independent teams and synthesis across multiple high-quality studies would provide stronger evidence.

The article concerns elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy. It does not automatically apply to emergency surgery, other operations, children, people with severe complications, or individuals whose anxiety requires professional mental-health care. The intervention and comparison conditions also need to be similar before results can reasonably be compared.

A statistically significant difference does not by itself tell a reader how large or personally noticeable the change was. To understand practical importance, a full-text review should examine the actual score differences, variation, confidence intervals, protocol, missing data, and adverse-event reporting. An abstract is useful for orientation, not a substitute for complete appraisal.

The authors' conclusion is part of the published study, not a guarantee for an individual patient. Clinical decisions must consider the wider evidence, the patient's condition, hospital policy, and professional judgment.

An Honest Place for Reiki Around Surgery

A patient interested in Reiki should first ask the surgical team whether and when a complementary practice is permitted. Hospital rules, infection control, monitoring, timing, touch restrictions, and the patient's condition may affect what is appropriate. The practitioner should not interfere with staff or equipment.

Consent remains essential. A relative should not arrange Reiki for an adult patient without that person's agreement. I do not send distant Reiki to someone who has not asked, even when I would like to help. That restraint is part of how I understand respectful practice.

It is also reasonable for a patient to decline. No one should be told that refusing Reiki shows a bad attitude or reduces the chance of recovery. A complementary practice is optional, while urgent and medically necessary care is not replaced by it.

Reading Reiki Research Without Hype

I look for five things when reading a study: the exact population, the comparison groups, the measured outcome, the size and duration of the trial, and the difference between the authors' conclusion and what the data can support. This simple checklist prevents a headline from becoming a larger claim than the research.

I also compare the article with a broader evidence source. The U.S. National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health states that Reiki has not been clearly shown effective for health-related purposes and describes the research as generally inconsistent and often low quality. One positive trial should therefore be read as one contribution to an unsettled evidence base.

This cautious reading does not require dismissing a participant's experience. A person may report feeling calmer, and that report matters to them. Scientific evidence asks a different question: whether a measured difference can be attributed to the intervention and expected in other people.

FAQ

Q: Does this trial prove that Reiki treats gallbladder disease?

A: No. The trial measured self-reported surgical fear and anxiety before a scheduled laparoscopic operation. It did not test Reiki as a treatment for gallbladder disease itself, and it says nothing about whether Reiki could ever replace surgery.

Q: Should someone delay surgery to try Reiki?

A: No. Reiki must never delay diagnosis, surgery, medication, or any other care recommended by qualified healthcare professionals. The trial placed its intervention before a scheduled operation, so it describes something offered alongside standard surgical care, never a substitute for it.

Q: Does a randomized trial settle the question?

A: No. Randomization strengthens a comparison, but it does not remove every limit. A three-group trial of 48 patients in a single setting, measuring self-reported fear and anxiety, needs replication elsewhere before anyone treats the question as settled.

Key Insights to Remember

A study can be encouraging without being conclusive. Respecting research means reporting both the result and the limits of what was tested.
Personal practice and scientific evidence are different forms of information. My experience explains my values, but it does not replace controlled research or medical judgment.
A responsible complementary practice stays within consent and hospital rules. It supports a person's chosen moment of calm without making medical promises.