Background Mood disorders such as anxiety and depression represent a significant global disease burden. While pharmacotherapy (e.g., SSRIs) and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) are mainstream interventions, they are associated with limitations including side effects, dependency, accessibility, and reliance on patient engagement. Mind–body exercises like Tai Chi (TC) have emerged as a potential complementary approach, but their comparative role and value within the intervention landscape remain to be clearly delineated. Objective This narrative review aims to critically synthesize and interpret existing literature to compare the role of Tai Chi with pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy (primarily CBT) in mental health interventions. It seeks to elucidate TC’s potential benefits, limitations, mechanisms, and its integrative potential within a multimodal treatment framework. Methods Employing a narrative review methodology, we conducted a purposive and critical analysis of key literature, including systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and pivotal randomized controlled trials identified through databases such as PubMed and Web of Science. The synthesis was guided by a conceptual comparative framework focusing on mechanisms, onset of action, applicability, side effects, and long-term outcomes. As a narrative review, this work prioritizes theoretical integration and interpretive analysis over systematic, exhaustive literature retrieval and quantitative synthesis. Findings Our qualitative synthesis suggests that TC may offer a distinct, body-awareness-based intervention pathway. Compared to pharmacotherapy, TC appears devoid of drug-related side effects and may contribute to sustained wellbeing and overall health, albeit with a slower onset, making it potentially suitable as an adjunct in long-term management. Relative to CBT, TC provides a non-verbal, somatic approach that may complement cognitive restructuring by addressing physiological symptoms of anxiety and depression. Literature indicates that adjunctive use of TC alongside conventional treatments may yield synergistic benefits. However, evidence on long-term efficacy and optimal integration protocols remains preliminary, and findings are interpreted within the acknowledged limitations of heterogeneous primary studies. Hence, TC may hold value as a complementary mind–body intervention within mental health care. Its integration with pharmacotherapy or CBT seems promising but requires careful clinical structuring. Future research should prioritize high-quality trials on integrated protocols and the standardization of TC interventions. This review underscores the importance of a nuanced, patient-centered approach that considers TC as part of a broader therapeutic toolkit.
Zhang et al. (Wed,) studied this question.