A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Effects of Remote, Intercessory Prayer on Outcomes in Patients Admitted to the Coronary Care Unit
📄 Original study📌 Appears in:
Plain English Summary
Nearly a thousand heart patients in a coronary care unit were secretly split into two groups: one received daily prayers from teams of five Christian volunteers for 28 days, and the other got standard care only. Nobody -- not the patients, not the doctors -- knew who was being prayed for. Using a custom scoring system that tracked 34 different bad outcomes (complications, procedures, etc.), the prayed-for group scored 11% better than the non-prayer group, a statistically significant result. Here's the catch, though: when the researchers tried to measure outcomes using the same scoring system from an earlier landmark prayer study by Byrd, the effect vanished (p = .29). Hospital stays were identical too. So the headline result hinges entirely on a brand-new, unvalidated measurement tool, which makes it hard to call this a clean replication. It ended up in a major Cochrane review of prayer research, sitting awkwardly between suggestive and inconclusive.
Research Notes
Second major RCT of intercessory prayer for cardiac patients, explicitly designed to replicate Byrd (1988). Central to the distant healing/prayer controversy: the positive MAHI-CCU result is offset by the failure to replicate using Byrd's own scoring system and the use of an unvalidated outcome measure. Included in the Roberts et al. (2011) Cochrane meta-analysis.
Consecutive coronary care unit admissions (N=990) at Mid America Heart Institute were randomized to receive daily remote intercessory prayer from teams of 5 Christian volunteers for 28 days, or usual care alone, under fully double-blind conditions with an IRB waiver of informed consent. Using a newly developed weighted MAHI-CCU composite score of 34 adverse events and procedures, the prayer group scored 11% lower than usual care (6.35 vs 7.13, P=.04). The unweighted event count also favored prayer (2.7 vs 3.0, P=.04). However, the effect did not replicate using Byrd's original categorical hospital course score (P=.29), and no individual outcome component reached significance. Length of CCU and hospital stay did not differ. The authors concluded that intercessory prayer may be an effective adjunct to standard medical care.
Links
Related Papers
Replication Of
More in Healing
Effects of Intentionally-Treated Water on Cell Migration of Human Glioblastoma Cells
Water, Wine and the Sacred, An Anthropological View of Substances Altered by Intentioned Awareness, Including Objective and Aesthetic Effects
Transcriptional Changes in Cancer Cells Induced by Exposure to a Healing Method
Two Meta-Analyses of Noncontact Healing Studies
Infrared Spectra Alteration in Water Proximate to the Palms of Therapeutic Practitioners
📋 Cite this paper
Harris, William S, Gowda, Manohar, Kolb, Jerry W, Strychacz, Christopher P, Vacek, James L, Jones, Philip G, Forker, Alan, O'Keefe, James H, McCallister, Ben D (1999). A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Effects of Remote, Intercessory Prayer on Outcomes in Patients Admitted to the Coronary Care Unit. Archives of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.159.19.2273
@article{harris_1999_prayer,
title = {A Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Effects of Remote, Intercessory Prayer on Outcomes in Patients Admitted to the Coronary Care Unit},
author = {Harris, William S and Gowda, Manohar and Kolb, Jerry W and Strychacz, Christopher P and Vacek, James L and Jones, Philip G and Forker, Alan and O'Keefe, James H and McCallister, Ben D},
year = {1999},
journal = {Archives of Internal Medicine},
doi = {10.1001/archinte.159.19.2273},
}