The effectiveness of foot reflexology in inducing ovulation: a sham-controlled randomized trial
In Plain Language: reflexology, explained
To determine whether foot reflexology, a complementary therapy, has an effect greater than sham reflexology on induction of ovulation. Sham-controlled randomized trial with patients and statistician blinded. Infertility clinic in Plymouth, United Kingdom. Forty-eight women attending the clinic with anovulation. Women were randomized to receive eight sessions of either genuine foot reflexology or sham reflexology with gentle massage over 10 weeks. The primary outcome was ovulation detected by serum progesterone level of >30 nmol/L during the study period. Twenty-six patients were randomized to genuine reflexology and 22 to sham (one randomized patient was withdrawn). Patients remained blinded throughout the trial. The rate of ovulation during true reflexology was 11 out of 26 (42%), and during sham reflexology it was 10 out of 22 (46%). Pregnancy rates were 4 out of 26 in the true group and 2 out of 22 in the control group. Because of recruitment difficulties, the required sample size of 104 women was not achieved. Patient blinding of reflexology studies is feasible. Although this study was too small to reach a definitive conclusion on the specific effect of foot reflexology, the results suggest that any effect on ovulation would not be clinically relevant. Sham reflexology may have a beneficial general effect, which this study was not designed to detect.
Key Findings: what this randomised trial found
- ✓Genuine foot reflexology did not significantly improve ovulation rates compared to sham reflexology, with 42% ovulation in the true reflexology group versus 46% in the sham group.
- ✓Pregnancy rates were similarly low between both groups, occurring in 4 out of 26 women (15%) receiving genuine reflexology and 2 out of 22 women (9%) receiving sham reflexology.
- ✓The study was unable to reach its required sample size due to recruitment difficulties, limiting the statistical power of the conclusions.
What This Means for You
If you're considering reflexology for fertility issues, current evidence suggests it's unlikely to be more effective than a placebo treatment, so discuss other evidence-based options with your fertility specialist.
What This Means for Practitioners
While patient blinding in reflexology studies is feasible, this research suggests any specific effect of foot reflexology on ovulation induction would not be clinically significant, though general relaxation benefits may exist.
Study Design: how this randomised trial was run
Common questions about this study
What does this study mean in practice?
If you're considering reflexology for fertility issues, current evidence suggests it's unlikely to be more effective than a placebo treatment, so discuss other evidence-based options with your fertility specialist.
What did this study find?
Genuine foot reflexology did not significantly improve ovulation rates compared to sham reflexology, with 42% ovulation in the true reflexology group versus 46% in the sham group. Pregnancy rates were similarly low between both groups, occurring in 4 out of 26 women (15%) receiving genuine reflexology and 2 out of 22 women (9%) receiving sham reflexology. The study was unable to reach its required sample size due to recruitment difficulties, limiting the statistical power of the conclusions.
How strong is this evidence?
This is a randomised trial and we rate its evidence limited. It covers 48 participants. It was published in Fertility and sterility. Reflexology is a complementary therapy, not a replacement for medical treatment.
Looking for a reflexologist?
Find practitioners who can help with the conditions studied in this research.
Find a Reflexologist