Craniosacral Therapy - Evidence Base

Evidence Base

A systematic review conducted in 1999 found "insufficient scientific evidence to recommend craniosacral therapy to patients, practitioners or third party payers for any clinical condition." The authors of this review noted: "in accord with a basic tenet of craniosacral therapy, there is evidence for a craniosacral rhythm, impulse or 'primary respiration' independent of other measurable body rhythms (heart rate, or respiration)... However, these and other studies do not provide any valid evidence that such a craniosacral 'rhythm' or 'pulse' can be reliably perceived by an examiner". The reason for this finding, according to these reviewers, was a lack of suitable evidence—such as random controlled trials of its effects on health outcomes—in the literature on craniosacral therapy. The reviewers found available evidence to be weak methodologically, highly variable, lacking consistency and unable to support "logical 'positive' conclusions regarding craniosacral therapy." The reviewers concluded: "The issue is not that craniosacral therapy is a 'non mainstream' entity. Rigorous and scientifically defensible studies are clearly possible on all its aspects. If undertaken, such research would be of great value in providing the necessary direction for administrators, practitioners and patients alike".

However, further preliminary research has been conducted since the 1999 review to investigate hypothesized biological mechanisms (such as possible impact on tone of the autonomic nervous system), assess the impact of craniosacral therapy, and measure interrater reliability. A 2011 systematic review concluded that the evidence base surrounding craniosacral therapy and its efficacy is sparse and composed of studies with heterogeneous design. The authors of this review stated that current evidence is insufficient to use to draw conclusions and further study is needed to better evaluate if craniosacral therapy has therapeutic benefit.