Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 14;2021:7443498. doi: 10.1155/2021/7443498

Table 2.

Summary of randomized controlled trials included in the systematic review (n = 18).

Study participants Intervention Control Attrition rate Outcome measures Key findingsϮ
Health condition Age (years)
Author and place Range Mean/median
General women
Wu et al. (1996), China [49] Menopausal 40–60 50 Unspecified QG (n = 32); 1 month Treated with vitamins E, B6, and/or oryzanol (n = 18) QG: 6%
Control: 17%
a) Climacteric syndrome (KI)
b) Autonomic balance (Wengerǁ)
c) Serum FSH (RIA)
d) serum LH (RIA)
e) serum 2 (RIA)
f) serum P (RIA)
g) serum T (RIA)
Within-group improvement:
(a) p < 0.01
b), d), e) p < 0.05
c), f), g) No significant changes
QG/control:
a) p < 0.01
b) p < 0.05
Chen et al. (2006), Taiwan [57] Middle-aged 35–60 QG: 45.7 ± 6.1
Control: 44.6 ± 5.5
Baduanjin QG (n = 45): 3 times/week; 12 weeks No treatment (n = 45) QG: 2%
Control: 4%
a) Serum IL-6 (ELISA)
b) BMD (densitometry)
Within-group improvement:
a) p < 0.001
b) No significant changes
QG/control:
a) p < 0.001
b) p=0.49
González López-Arza et al. (2013), Spain [56] Young 18–25 22.4 ± 2.5 Wang Ziping QG (n = 15); 60 min/session; twice a week; 4 weeks No treatment (n = 15) QG: 13%
Control: 7%
a) Balance (UBT) Within-group improvement:
a) p < 0.045
QG/control:
a) No significant differences

Abused women
Cheung et al. (2019), China [24] Survivors of intimate partner violence ≥18 QG: 42.0 ± 8.7
Control: 41.5 ± 9.3
Baduanjin QG (n = 136)
Week 1–6 (training): 120 min/session; twice a week; 6 weeks
Week 7–22: 60 min/session; once a week; 16 weeks
Home practice: 30 min/day; once daily, 22 weeks
Wait-list with health education (n = 135) QG: 12%
Control: 6%
a) PBMC telomerase activity (ELISA)
b) Plasma TNF (ELISA)
c) Plasma IL-6 (ELISA)
d) Depression (BDI)
e) Stress (PSS)
f) Coping (PCS)
Within-group improvement:
a) p=0.05
d), e) p < 0.001
QG/control:
d), e) 6-week: p=0.009 and 0.02, respectively; 22-week: No significant differences
a), b), c), f) No significant differences

Women with chronic conditions
Chen et al. (2013), China [47] Breast cancer patients receiving radiotherapy 25–64 QG: 45.3 ± 6.3
Control: 44.7 ± 9.7
Guolin QG (n = 49); 40 min/session; once a week; 5 weeks Wait-list with usual care (n = 47) QG: 2%
Control: 8%
a) QOL (FACT-G)
b) Depression (CES-D)
c) Fatigue (BFI)
d) Sleep quality (PSQI)
e) Stress/cortisol rhythm (TRFIA)
Within-group improvement:
b) p=0.001
a), c), d), e) No significant changes
QG/control:
b) p=0.05
a), c), d), e) No significant differences
Higher baseline depressive group:
a) p < 0.01
b) p < 0.06
c) p < 0.05
d), e) No significant differences
Oh et al. (2014), Australia [30] Metastatic breast cancer ≥18 QG: 56.9 ± 12.1
Control: 57.8 ± 10.8
Medical QG (n = 14); 60 min/session; once a week; 10 weeks
Home practice: 15–30 min/session; 3–4 times/week; 10 weeks
Meditation (n = 13) QG: 36%
Control: 38%
a) QOL (FACT-B)
b) Fatigue (FACT-F)
c) Stress (PSS)
d) Neuropathy (FACT-GOG-NTX)
e) Sexual function (SFQ)
QG/control:
d) p=0.014
a), b), c), e) No significant differences
Liu et al. (2017), China [48] Breast cancer survivors 21–80 QG: 50.9 ± 7.0
Control: 51.3 ± 7.3
Guolin QG (n = 79); 60 min/session; twice a week; 24 weeks
Home practice: 40 min/session; 5 times/week; 24 weeks
Physical stretching (n= 75) QG: 41%
Control: 18%
a) QOL (FACT-B)
b) Anxiety (HADS)
c) Depression (HADS)
d) Immunological markers (serum IL-2, IFN-γ, and TNF) (ELISA)
e) Breast cancer-specific marker (serum CA 15–3) (RIA)
Within-group improvement:
a), c) p < 0.05
b) p < 0.01
d) All markers: p < 0.001
e) p < 0.001
QG/control:
a) p=0.002
d) IFN-γ and TNF: p=0.03
b), c), e) No significant differences
Loh et al. (2014), Malaysia [55] Breast cancer survivors 18–65 n/a Zhi Neng QG (n = 66): 90 min/session; once a week; 8 weeks
Home practice: 30 min/session; twice a week; 8 weeks
(i) Line dancing (n = 65)
(ii) Wait-list with usual care (n = 66)
QG: 52%
Line dancing: 52%
Usual care: 52%
a) QOL (FACT-B)
b) Fatigue (FACIT-F)
c) Depression (DASS-21)
d) Anxiety (DASS-21)
e) Stress (DASS-21)
QG/Line dancing:
a) p=0.036
b), c), d), e) No significant differences
QG/usual care:
a) p=0.048
b), c), d), e) No significant differences
Larkey et al. (2015), United states [52] Breast cancer survivors 40–75 QG: 57.7 ± 8.9
Control: 59.8 ± 8.9
QG/TCE§ (n = 49); 60 min/session; 1–2 times/week; 12 weeks
Home practice: 30 min/session; 5 times/week; 12 weeks
Sham QGǂ (n = 52) QG: 14%
Control: 13%
a) Fatigue (FSI)
b) Depression (BDI)
c) Sleep quality (PSQI)
Within-group improvement:
b), c) p < 0.05
QG/control:
a) p = 0.005 at postintervention; p = 0.024 at 3-month follow-up
b), c) No significant differences
Larkey et al. (2016), United States [51] Breast cancer survivors 40–75 QG: 57.7 ± 8.9
Control: 59.8 ± 8.9
QG/TCE§ (n = 49); 60 min/session; 1–2 times/week; 12 weeks
Home practice: 30 min/session; 5 times/week; 12 weeks
Sham QGǂ (n = 52) QG: 14%
Control: 13%
a) Mental and physical QOL (SF-36)
b) Cognitive function (FACT-COG (subjective) and WAIS-III (objective))
c) PA levels (BPAQ)
d) BMI
Within-group improvement:
a) p < 0.001
b) FACT-COG: p < 0.001; WAIS-III: p < 0.05
c) p=0.015
d) p=0.048
QG/control:
d) p=0.048
a), b), c) No significant differences
3-month follow-up: all with no significant changes across time or intergroup differences
Myers et al. (2019), United States [53] Breast cancer survivors >18 QG: 52.9 ± 12.0
Sham QG: 53.1 ± 10.7
SS: 56.2 ± 11.3
Liuzijue QG (n = 19); 60 min/session; once a week; 8 weeks
Home practice: 15 min/session; twice daily; 8 weeks
(i) Sham QGǂ (n = 20)
(ii) Survivorship support (SS) (n = 11)
QG: 21%
Sham QGǂ: 50%
SS: 0%
a) Cognitive function (FACT- COG (subjective), RAVLT, and TMT (objective))
b) Fatigue (MDASI)
c) Sleep disturbance (MDASI)
d) Distress (MDASI)
e) PA levels (WHI PAQ)
QG/sham:
a) TMT: p=0.007
b), c), d), e) No significant differences
QG/SS:
a) FACT-COG: p < 0.05
d) p < 0.02
b), c), e) No significant differences
Ying et al. (2019), China [50] Breast cancer survivors 36–72 54.1 ± 7.8 Baduanjin QG (n = 50): 60 min/session; 3 times/week; 6 months
Home practice: 20 min/session; 4 times/week; 6 months
No treatment (n = 50) QG: 8%
Control: 20%
a) BMI
b) Heart rate variability (heart rate monitor)
c) Lung capacity (spirometry)
d) Arm circumference on the affected side
e) Shoulder ROM on the affected side (goniometry)
f) Cardiopulmonary function (3-min step test)
g) Anxiety (GAD-7)
h) Depression (PHQ-9)
i) QOL (FACT-B)
QG/control:
b) p=0.004
e), i) p=0.000
h) p=0.020
a), c), d), f), g) No significant differences

Youngwanich setha et al. (2013), Thailand [58] Diabetic, postpartum n/a QG: 35.0 ± 5.6
Control: 36.2 ± 4.5
Lin Housheng QG (n = 34)
Week 1 and 2: 50 min/session; 3 times/week; 2 weeks
Week 3–12: Home practice: 5 times/week; 10 weeks
Usual care (n = 35) QG: 6%
Control: 9%
a) FPG (chemical analyzer)
b) HbA1c (chemical analyzer)
c) Blood pressure
d) Body weight, BMI
QG/control:
a) p=0.018
b) p=0.038
c) Systolic: p=0.016; diastolic: p=0.032
d) No significant differences
Liu et al. (2018), China [26] Diabetic, obese n/a 57.2 ± 5.4 Baduanjin QG (n = 20): 90 min/session; 6 times/week; 24 weeks (2-week training, followed by 22-week self-practice) No treatment (n = 20) QG: 15%
Control: 10%
a) Body weight, BMI
b) WC, WHR
c) FPG (chemical analyzer)
d) HbA1c (chemical analyzer)
e) TG (chemical analyzer)
f) TC (chemical analyzer)
g) LDL (chemical analyzer)
h) HDL (chemical analyzer)
i) serum RBP4 (ELISA)
Within-group improvement:
b), c), d), e), h), i) p < 0.05
a), f), g) No significant changes
QG/control:
b), c), d), e), h), i) p < 0.05
a), f), g) No significant differences
Liu et al. (2012), United States [18] Fibromyalgia 24–70 QG: 55.7
Control: 57.5
Liuzijue QG (n = 8); 45–60 min/session; once a week; 6 weeks
Home practice: 15–20 min/session; twice daily; 6 weeks
Sham QGǂ (n= 6) QG: 25%
Control: 0%
a) Pain (SMPQ)
b) Fatigue (MFI-20)
c) Sleep quality (PSQI)
d) Fibromyalgia impact (FIQ)
QG/control:
a), b), c), d) p < 0.0125
Sarmento et al. (2020), United States [54] Fibromyalgia 18–70 QG: 42.6 ± 10.7
Control: 56.1 ± 12.3
Liuzijue QG (n = 14); 45 min/session; once a week; 10 weeks
Home practice: Twice daily; 10 weeks
Sham QGǂ (n = 14) QG: 29%
Control: 29%
a) Pain (SMPQ, VAS, and PPT)
b) Sleep quality (PSQI)
c) Fatigue (FIQ)
d) Anxiety (HADS)
e) Depression (HADS)
f) Fibromyalgia impact (FIQ)
g) QOL (QOLS)
QG/control:
a), b), c), d), e), f) p < 0.05
g) p < 0.05 for control group presenting greater improvement
An et al. (2008), China [23] Knee osteoarthritis >55 QG: 65.4 ± 8.2
Control: 64.6 ± 6.7
Baduanjin QG (n = 14): 30 min/session; 5 times/week; 8 weeks No treatment (n = 14) QG: 21%
Control: 29%
a) Pain (WOMAC)
b) Stiffness (WOMAC)
c) Physical function (WOMAC)
d) Aerobic capacity (6-MWT)
e) Peak torque of the knee extensors (Isokinetic dynamometry)
f) General health, social function, and mental health (SF-36)
QG/control:
a) p=0.006
b) p=0.029
c) p=0.024
d) p=0.036
e) p=0.016
f) No significant differences
Chan et al. (2017), China [46] Chronic fatigue syndrome <50 QG: 39.5
Control: 42.0
Baduanjin QG (n = 46): 90 min/session; 16 sessions; 9 weeks Wait-list with usual care (n= 62) n/a a) Plasma adiponectin (ELISA)
b) Anxiety (HADS)
c) Depression (HADS)
QG/control:
a), b) p < 0.05
c) p < 0.001
3-month follow-up: all with no significant differences

6-MWT, 6-minute walk test; BDI, Beck Depression Inventory; BMD, bone mineral density; BMI, body mass index; BFI, Brief Fatigue Inventory; BPAQ, Brief Physical Activity Questionnaire; CA 15-3, carcinoma antigen 15-3, CES-D, Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale; DASS-21, Depression and Anxiety Stress Scale-21; E2, estradiol; ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; FACIT-F, Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue; FACT-B, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast; FACT-COG, FACT-Cognitive Function; FACT-F, FACT-fatigue; FACT-G, FACT-General; FACT-GOG-NTX, FACT-Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity; FIQ, Fibromyalgia Impact Questionnaire; FPG, fasting plasma glucose; FSH, follicle-stimulating hormone; FSI, Fatigue Symptom Inventory; GAD-7, generalized anxiety disorder-7; HADS, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale; HbA1c, hemoglobin A1c; HDL, high-density lipoprotein; IFN-γ, interferon- γ; IL-2, interleukin-2; IL-6, interleukin-6; KI, Kupperman Index; LDL, low-density lipoprotein; LH, luteinizing hormone; MDASI, MD Anderson Cancer Symptom Inventory; MFI-20, Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory; P, progesterone; PA, physical activity; PBMC, peripheral blood mononuclear cells; PCS, Perceived Coping Scale; PHQ-9, Patient Health Questionnaire; PPT, pressure pain threshold; PSQI, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index; PSS, Perceived Stress Scale; QG, Qigong; QOL, quality of life; QOLS, Quality of Life Scale; RAVLT, Rey auditory verbal learning test; SF-36, Short Form-36; SFQ, Sexual Functioning Questionnaire; RBP4, retinol binding protein 4; RIA, ROM, range of motion; radioimmunoassay; SMPQ, short-form McGill Pain Questionnaire; T, testosterone; TC, total cholesterol; TCE, Tai Chi Easy; TG, triglyceride; TMT, trail making test; TNF, tumor necrosis factor; TRFIA, time-resolved fluorescence immunoassay; UBT, unipedal balance test; VAS, visual analog scale; WAIS-III, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Third Edition; WC, waist circumference; WHI PAQ, women's health initiative brief physical activity questionnaire; WHR; waist-to-hip ratio; and WOMAC, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index. Only Chinese version is available. Participants were randomly assigned to either the QG or control groups by adaptive randomization, namely “minimization”, so the groups were balanced evenly according to demographic information and clinical conditions. §Tai Chi Easy (QG/TCE) is a simplified form of traditional Tai Chi, which is repeated and also includes QG bodily movements. The adaptations to the pace, the repetition, and the ease of learning make TCE like a typical QG exercise. ǂSham QG mimicked the QG movements but without healing sounds or meditation and breath focus. ǁAutonomic response patterns in resting conditions (i.e., salivary output, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, heart period, respiration period, and sublingual temperature) were examined in order to reflect participants' autonomic balance conditions before and after the intervention. ϮAll key findings with significant levels demonstrated improvements in the outcome measures, except specifically indicated. “Within-group improvement” represented within-group improvement for specific outcomes for intervention groups from baseline to the completion of the intervention, while “QG/control”, “QG/line dancing”, “QG/usual care”, “QG/sham”, and “QG/SS” represented between-group differences in either percentage or absolute changes from baseline to the completion of the intervention.