OBJECTIVES: This study gathers preliminary data about the biologic effects of repeated Swedish massage therapy compared to a light-touch control condition. DESIGN: The study design was a 5-week comparison of repeated Swedish massage and light touch on oxytocin (OT), arginine-vasopressin (AVP), adrenal corticotropin hormone (ACTH), cortisol (CORT), circulating phenotypic lymphocyte markers, and mitogen-stimulated cytokine function. SETTING: The setting was an outpatient research unit in an academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: The study subjects were medically and psychiatrically healthy young adults. INTERVENTION: The study comprised 45 minutes of Swedish massage or light touch, using highly specified and identical protocols, either weekly or twice weekly for 5 weeks. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures were mean differences between massage and light touch on OT, AVP, ACTH, CORT, lymphocyte markers, and cytokine levels. RESULTS: Compared to the touch control condition, weekly Swedish massage stimulated a sustained pattern of increased circulating phenotypic lymphocyte markers and decreased mitogen-stimulated cytokine production, similar to what was previously reported for a single massage session, while having minimal effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function. Twice-weekly massage produced a different response pattern with increased OT levels, decreased AVP, and decreased CORT but little effect on circulating lymphocyte phenotypic markers and a slight increase in mitogen-stimulated interferon-γ, tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin (IL)-1b and IL-2 levels, suggesting increased production of pro-inflammatory cytokines. CONCLUSIONS: There are sustained cumulative biologic actions for the massage and touch interventions that persist for several days or a week, and these differ profoundly depending on the dosage (frequency) of sessions. Confirmatory studies in larger samples are needed.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: This study gathers preliminary data about the biologic effects of repeated Swedish massage therapy compared to a light-touch control condition. DESIGN: The study design was a 5-week comparison of repeated Swedish massage and light touch on oxytocin (OT), arginine-vasopressin (AVP), adrenal corticotropin hormone (ACTH), cortisol (CORT), circulating phenotypic lymphocyte markers, and mitogen-stimulated cytokine function. SETTING: The setting was an outpatient research unit in an academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: The study subjects were medically and psychiatrically healthy young adults. INTERVENTION: The study comprised 45 minutes of Swedish massage or light touch, using highly specified and identical protocols, either weekly or twice weekly for 5 weeks. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures were mean differences between massage and light touch on OT, AVP, ACTH, CORT, lymphocyte markers, and cytokine levels. RESULTS: Compared to the touch control condition, weekly Swedish massage stimulated a sustained pattern of increased circulating phenotypic lymphocyte markers and decreased mitogen-stimulated cytokine production, similar to what was previously reported for a single massage session, while having minimal effect on hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal function. Twice-weekly massage produced a different response pattern with increased OT levels, decreased AVP, and decreased CORT but little effect on circulating lymphocyte phenotypic markers and a slight increase in mitogen-stimulated interferon-γ, tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin (IL)-1b and IL-2 levels, suggesting increased production of pro-inflammatory cytokines. CONCLUSIONS: There are sustained cumulative biologic actions for the massage and touch interventions that persist for several days or a week, and these differ profoundly depending on the dosage (frequency) of sessions. Confirmatory studies in larger samples are needed.
Authors: Jean S Kutner; Marlaine C Smith; Lisa Corbin; Linnea Hemphill; Kathryn Benton; B Karen Mellis; Brenda Beaty; Sue Felton; Traci E Yamashita; Lucinda L Bryant; Diane L Fairclough Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2008-09-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Becky Kinkead; Pamela J Schettler; Erika R Larson; Dedric Carroll; Margaret Sharenko; James Nettles; Sherry A Edwards; Andrew H Miller; Mylin A Torres; Boadie W Dunlop; Jeffrey J Rakofsky; Mark Hyman Rapaport Journal: Cancer Date: 2017-10-17 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Adam Perlman; Susan Gould Fogerite; Oliver Glass; Elizabeth Bechard; Ather Ali; Valentine Y Njike; Carl Pieper; Natalia O Dmitrieva; Alison Luciano; Lisa Rosenberger; Teresa Keever; Carl Milak; Eric A Finkelstein; Gwendolyn Mahon; Giovanni Campanile; Ann Cotter; David L Katz Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2018-12-12 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Wang Wen-Yue; Xu Ying-Peng; Ding Quan-Mao; Xie Li-Min; Wang De-Zhi; Bai Yang; Wang Li-Su; Li Yu-Bin; Niu Zhi-Jun; Ma Yan-Xu; Chen Wu-Zhong; Bai Li-Qun; Liu Yang; Jin Li-Kun Journal: Trials Date: 2022-07-08 Impact factor: 2.728
Authors: Caroline A Smith; Kate M Levett; Carmel T Collins; Hannah G Dahlen; Carolyn C Ee; Machiko Suganuma Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2018-03-28
Authors: Katharina L Wiest; Victoria J Asphaug; Kathryn E Carr; Emily A Gowen; Timothy T Hartnett Journal: Int J Ther Massage Bodywork Date: 2015-03-01
Authors: Francesco Cerritelli; Marco Chiera; Marco Abbro; Valentino Megale; Jorge Esteves; Alberto Gallace; Andrea Manzotti Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2021-06-30 Impact factor: 4.003