A critical evaluation of the theory and practice of therapeutic touch

  1. Dónal P. O'Mathúna BSc (Pharm) PhD MA1,
  2. Steven Pryjmachuk BA (Hons) PGDpEd (Nursing) MSc RN RNT2,
  3. Wayne Spencer3,
  4. Michael Stanwick BA BSc (Hons)4,
  5. Stephen Matthiesen Dipl-Phys PhD5

Article first published online: 28 JUN 2002

DOI: 10.1046/j.1466-769X.2002.00089.x

Issue

Nursing Philosophy

Nursing Philosophy

Volume 3, Issue 2, pages 163–176 , July 2002

Additional Information

How to Cite

O'Mathúna, D. P., Pryjmachuk, S., Spencer, W., Stanwick, M. and Matthiesen, S. (2002), A critical evaluation of the theory and practice of therapeutic touch. Nursing Philosophy, 3: 163–176 . doi: 10.1046/j.1466-769X.2002.00089.x

Author Information

  1. 1

    Professor of Bioethics and Chemistry, Mount Carmel College of Nursing, Columbus, Ohio, USA,

  2. 2

    Nurse Tutor and Doctoral Student, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Visiting, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK,

  3. 3

    Independent Scholar, UK,

  4. 4

    Retired Teacher, UK, and

  5. 5

    Research Fellow, Institute for Meteorology, University of Edinburgh, UK

* Dónal P.O’Mathúna, Professor of Bioethics and Chemistry, Mount Carmel College of Nursing, 127 South Davis Ave., Columbus, Ohio 43222, USA. Tel.: (614) 234–5414; fax: (614) 234 2875; e-mail: domathuna@mchs.com

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 28 JUN 2002
  2. Article first published online: 28 JUN 2002

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (109K)

Keywords:

  • therapeutic touch;
  • complementary therapies;
  • Science of Unitary Human Beings;
  • evidence-based practice;
  • quantum physics;
  • ethical issues in nursing

Abstract In this paper, the theory and practice of therapeutic touch (TT) is scrutinized from a number of perspectives. Firstly, the alleged close relationship between TT and Martha Rogers’ Science of Unitary Human Beings is evaluated. Secondly, the employment of the language of modern physics in Rogers’ theory and TT is critically examined. The authors then review the research literature on TT's efficacy, completing their critique by discussing the ethical issues involved in the practice of TT. As each of the perspectives considered reveals some concerns, the paper concludes that TT is a questionable intervention, underpinned by a very weak theoretical, clinical and research base.

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (109K)