Evidence Hub

Patients' experiences and perceived outcomes of manual therapy: a qualitative systematic review with framework synthesis

Zhang Y, Liang S, Chen H, Sun Y, Yu C

Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland), 2026

Abstract

Objective: To systematically synthesize qualitative evidence on patient-reported experiences of manual therapies (including massage therapy, osteopathic manipulation, and craniosacral therapy) across biological, psychological, and social dimensions. We aimed to identify patient-perceived outcomes, contextual factors influencing the therapeutic process, and hypothesized mechanisms underlying patient experiences, thereby constructing an integrated conceptual framework centered on patient narratives.

Methods: A systematic search of Chinese and English databases was conducted from inception to March 2024 for qualitative studies exploring patient experiences of manual therapies. Methodological quality was assessed using the COREQ (Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research) checklist and the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) Qualitative Checklist. Best-fit framework synthesis was employed to integrate patient-reported outcomes within the COMET (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials) framework. Contextual factors influencing patient experiences were organized under the contextual factors framework proposed by Marco Testa for physical therapy. A diagnostic and therapeutic model of "assessment-intervention-feedback" was constructed based on the mechanisms of dynamic adaptation and multisensory integration.

Results: Fifteen studies were included. Manual therapies were found to significantly improve clinical symptoms, physical function, affective…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free