Bioenergy Treatment for Improving Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis

Abstract

Background: Bioenergy treatment devices have become popular and widely available for self-treatment to improve well-being. We meta-analyzed eight very similar studies of the Healy device to assess the joint effect size. Method: Eight studies with similar designs, some active controlled, some waitlist controlled, testing the Healy bioenergy device were meta-analyzed. They were conducted by the producer of the device. An additional search with appropriate keywords revealed no additional studies Result: The overall effect size across studies, combining all active arms and averaging outcome measures is Hedge’s g = 0.757 (random effects model, I2 = 85.8; z = 6.57; p < .0001). The stronger active intervention against control yields a heterogeneous g = 0.825 (random effects, I2 = 82.5; z = 7.77; p < .0001). Active treatments against each other result in a significant g = 0.29 (fixed effects, I2 = 0.0; z = 8.34; p < .0001). Discussion: The highest effect sizes are produced by a measure of coherence, followed by the WHO5 wellbeing questionnaire, the Perceived Stress Scale, with the Measure Your Own Medical Outcome Profile resulting in the smallest effect size. Heterogeneity can partially be explained by the type of control, with active control producing smaller, and wait-list controls larger outcomes. Another source of heterogeneity is the sequencing of studies: Effect sizes grow for three studies, which were similar and then fell and remained very similar for the rest of the studies. A limitation of this analysis is the fact that the studies were all done by the R&D-Department of the producer of the device, and an independent confirmation would be desirable. Conclusion: The Healy device is an effective bioenergy device for self-treatment to improve general well-being in healthy individuals.