Study B-02 - TM in Action

Transcendental Meditation, Workplace Wellbeing and Productivity — 2026 RCT

1. Full Citation

Khanal MK, Karimi L, Saunders P, Nguyen K, Lee K, Hallam KT, de Courten B. Effects of transcendental meditation on mental health and work productivity among university staff in Australia: A randomised controlled trial. Journal of Affective Disorders, 416 (2027), 122555. Published online 23 September 2026. DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2026.122555.

Reference Information

Journal: Journal of Affective Disorders
Year: 2026 online publication; 2027 journal volume
Study Code: B-02
Level of Evidence: Randomised Controlled Trial
Peer Reviewed: Yes
Trial Registration: ACTRN12625000134426

2. Research Question

Among Australian university staff, did six months of Transcendental Meditation reduce perceived stress and improve mental health, sleep, wellbeing, quality of life and work-productivity impairment compared with usual workplace wellbeing provision?

3. Participants

129 employees at one Australian university were randomised: 65 to TM and 64 to the control group. Participants included academic and non-academic staff, with a mean age of 48.7 years; approximately two-thirds were women.

116 participants completed the six-month assessment.

4. Method

This open-label randomised controlled trial compared standardised TM training, regular home practice and follow-up support with usual university wellbeing resources. Participants assigned to TM were advised to practise for 15–20 minutes twice daily.

Outcomes were assessed at baseline, three months and six months. Perceived stress was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included anxiety and depressive symptoms, burnout, sleep, wellbeing, health-related quality of life, work-productivity impairment measured using the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire, and sick leave.

The main analysis used baseline-adjusted linear mixed models under the intention-to-treat principle. Secondary outcomes were adjusted for multiple comparisons, and sensitivity analyses examined the robustness of the findings.

5. Key Findings

Compared with controls, the TM group showed statistically significant improvements over six months in perceived stress, anxiety and depressive symptoms, burnout, sleep, wellbeing and health-related quality of life.

Selected effect sizes from the main model, expressed as magnitudes of improvement, were:

Perceived stress: g = 0.52
Burnout: g = 0.70
Depressive symptoms: g = 0.50
Anxiety symptoms: g = 0.43
Sleep-related impairment: g = 0.47
Wellbeing: g = 0.49

Productivity: Work-productivity impairment improved, although the main analysis narrowly missed conventional statistical significance (p = .061). A robust sensitivity analysis found a statistically significant improvement (p = .021). This is promising initial evidence, but it does not conclusively establish that TM improves productivity.

There was no statistically significant reduction in sick leave.

Exploratory analyses found that twice-daily practice was associated with greater improvements in stress, burnout, depressive symptoms, wellbeing, and physical and mental quality of life. Practice frequency was not randomly assigned, so these associations do not establish that more frequent practice caused better outcomes.

No adverse events were reported during the study.

6. Practical Implications

This trial strengthens the evidence that TM may help reduce stress and burnout and support employee wellbeing in the university setting studied.

It also takes an important step towards examining productivity directly. However, the productivity finding depended on the statistical analysis used. Replication, including objective workplace measures, is needed before claiming a demonstrated productivity gain or calculating a financial return on workplace TM programmes.

7. Strengths and Limitations

Strengths

Peer-reviewed randomised controlled design involving 129 working employees.
Six-month follow-up with repeated assessments.
Established measures covering wellbeing and work-productivity impairment.
Intention-to-treat analysis, adjustment for multiple secondary outcomes, and sensitivity analyses.
Examination of practice frequency and outcomes.

Limitations

Volunteers came from one university, limiting generalisation to other workplaces.
Participants and instructors were not blinded, and outcomes were primarily self-reported.
Controls received usual wellbeing resources rather than an active programme with comparable instructor contact and support.
The study was powered for perceived stress, rather than productivity.
Productivity was a secondary outcome and was not statistically significant in the main analysis.
Practice-frequency findings were exploratory associations.
Follow-up ended at six months; longer-term effects remain uncertain.

Funding and interests

The study was partially funded by the David Lynch Foundation, Australia. The authors declared no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the work.

8. Related Topics

Primary: Business Success

Also relevant: Wellbeing & Health