-
Neurophysiologie Clinique = Clinical... Oct 2014We here review behavioral, neuroimaging and electrophysiological studies of hypnosis as a state, as well as hypnosis as a tool to modulate brain responses to painful... (Review)
Review
We here review behavioral, neuroimaging and electrophysiological studies of hypnosis as a state, as well as hypnosis as a tool to modulate brain responses to painful stimulations. Studies have shown that hypnotic processes modify internal (self awareness) as well as external (environmental awareness) brain networks. Brain mechanisms underlying the modulation of pain perception under hypnotic conditions involve cortical as well as subcortical areas including anterior cingulate and prefrontal cortices, basal ganglia and thalami. Combined with local anesthesia and conscious sedation in patients undergoing surgery, hypnosis is associated with improved peri- and postoperative comfort of patients and surgeons. Finally, hypnosis can be considered as a useful analogue for simulating conversion and dissociation symptoms in healthy subjects, permitting better characterization of these challenging disorders by producing clinically similar experiences.
Topics: Brain; Humans; Hypnosis; Hysteria; Nerve Net; Pain Perception
PubMed: 25306075
DOI: 10.1016/j.neucli.2013.09.006 -
Annals of Palliative Medicine Sep 2019Hypnosis has a long history of use for anesthesia and pain management, as well as in assisting patient to prepare for medical procedures. This article reviews the... (Review)
Review
Hypnosis has a long history of use for anesthesia and pain management, as well as in assisting patient to prepare for medical procedures. This article reviews the history of hypnosis applications in clinical medicine and dentistry. Research on hypnotic susceptibility or hypnotic ability shows that the ability to respond effectively to hypnosis is a relatively stable trait, partially heritable, and measurable by means of several standard procedures. Persons low in hypnotic ability may benefit from alternative therapeutic interventions; however, the majority of medical patients will benefit from the integration of adjunctive hypnotic therapies into their medical and dental care. The article closes with a discussion of the stronger evidence-based applications of hypnosis in healthcare, and the need for well-trained certified hypnosis practitioners.
Topics: Anesthesia; Certification; Chronic Pain; Clinical Competence; Dentistry, Operative; Evidence-Based Medicine; Health Personnel; Humans; Hypnosis; Interprofessional Relations; Obstetric Surgical Procedures; Pain Management; Trust
PubMed: 31431022
DOI: 10.21037/apm.2019.07.01 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2016This review is one in a series of Cochrane reviews investigating pain management for childbirth. These reviews all contribute to an overview of systematic reviews of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
This review is one in a series of Cochrane reviews investigating pain management for childbirth. These reviews all contribute to an overview of systematic reviews of pain management for women in labour, and share a generic protocol. This review updates an earlier version of the review of the same title.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effectiveness and safety of hypnosis for pain management during labour and childbirth.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (30 September 2015) and the reference lists of primary studies and review articles.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTS comparing preparation for labour using hypnosis and/or use of hypnosis during labour, with or without concurrent use of pharmacological or non-pharmacological pain relief methods versus placebo, no treatment or any analgesic drug or technique.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed trial quality. Where possible we contacted study authors seeking additional information about data and methodology.
MAIN RESULTS
We included nine trials randomising a total of 2954 women. The risk of bias in trials was variable, there were several well-designed large trials and some trials where little was reported about trial design. Although eight of the nine trials assessed antenatal hypnotherapy, there were considerable differences between these trials in timing and technique. One trial provided hypnotherapy during labour. In this updated review we compared hypnosis interventions with all control groups (main comparison) and also with specific control conditions: standard care (nine RCTs), supportive counselling (two RCTs) and relaxation training (two RCTs).In the main comparison, women in the hypnosis group were less likely to use pharmacological pain relief or analgesia than those in the control groups, (average risk ratio (RR) 0.73, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.94, eight studies, 2916 women; very low-quality evidence; random-effects model). There were no clear differences between women in the hypnosis group and those in the control groups for most of the other primary outcomes. There were no clear differences for sense of coping with labour (MD 0.22, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.58, one study, 420 women; low-quality evidence) or spontaneous vaginal birth (average RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.32, six studies, 2361 women; low-quality evidence; random-effects model). There were no clear differences for satisfaction with pain relief (measured on a seven-point scale two weeks postnatally) for women in the hypnosis group who also received pethidine (MD 0.41, 95% CI -0.45 to 1.27; one study, 72 women), Entonox (MD 0.19, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.57; one study, 357 women), self-hypnosis (MD 0.28, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.88; one study, 160 women), or epidural (MD -0.03, 95% CI -0.40 to 0.34; one study, 127 women), but a slight benefit in favour of hypnosis was seen for women who received water immersion (MD 0.52, 95% CI 0.04 to 1.00; one study, 174 women (all low-quality evidence). There were no clear differences for satisfaction with pain relief when it was measured as the number of women who reported they had adequate pain relief (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94 to 1.20, one study, 264 women; low-quality evidence). It should be noted that for pharmacological pain relief and spontaneous vaginal birth, there was evidence of considerable statistical heterogeneity, which could not be fully explained by subgroup analysis.For this review's secondary outcomes, no clear differences were found between women in the hypnosis group and women in the control groups for most outcomes where data were available. There was mixed evidence regarding benefits for women in the hypnosis group compared with all control groups for pain intensity, satisfaction with childbirth experience and postnatal depression. For each of these outcomes, data from more than one trial were available for analysis but could not be combined due to differences in measurement methods. There was evidence that fewer women in the hypnosis group stayed in hospital for more than two days after the birth but this finding was based on one small study (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.83). No clear differences between women in the hypnosis group and the control groups were found for the other secondary outcomes where data were available.In the comparisons of hypnosis with specific types of control conditions: standard care, supportive counselling and relaxation training, there were no clear differences found between women in the hypnosis group and those in the standard care control groups or the relaxation control groups for the primary outcomes. Compared with the women in the supportive counselling control group, women in the hypnosis group were less likely to use pharmacological analgesia (average RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.73, two studies, 562 women). They were also more likely to have a spontaneous vaginal birth (RR 2.42, 95% CI 1.43 to 4.07), although this finding was based on the results of one small study. Overall these new comparisons displayed much less statistical heterogeneity than the comparison including all control groups.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There are still only a relatively small number of studies assessing the use of hypnosis for labour and childbirth. Hypnosis may reduce the overall use of analgesia during labour, but not epidural use. No clear differences were found between women in the hypnosis group and those in the control groups for satisfaction with pain relief, sense of coping with labour or spontaneous vaginal birth. Not enough evidence currently exists regarding satisfaction with pain relief or sense of coping with labour and we would encourage any future research to prioritise the measurement of these outcomes. The evidence for the main comparison was assessed using GRADE as being of low quality for all the primary outcomes with downgrading decisions due to concerns regarding inconsistency of the evidence, limitations in design and imprecision. Further research is needed in the form of large, well-designed randomised controlled trials to assess whether hypnosis is of value for pain management during labour and childbirth.
Topics: Analgesia, Obstetrical; Female; Humans; Hypnosis; Labor Pain; Labor, Obstetric; Length of Stay; Patient Satisfaction; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Time Factors
PubMed: 27192949
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009356.pub3 -
Journal of Women's Health (2002) Mar 2020Poor sleep is one of the most frequent health concerns among menopausal women. All stages of sleep can be impacted by the menopause transition. Negative outcomes of poor... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
Poor sleep is one of the most frequent health concerns among menopausal women. All stages of sleep can be impacted by the menopause transition. Negative outcomes of poor sleep are multidimensional and include poor physical, psychological, cognition, and social outcomes. Hypnosis is a nonpharmacological treatment for poor sleep and hot flashes in menopausal women. The goal of hypnosis is to educate and train subjects to perform self-hypnosis to alleviate the underlying symptom. The use of hypnosis as a treatment for poor sleep has shown benefits for both acute and chronic insomnia. Initial findings from the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NCCIH) Hypnosis Intervention for Sleep in Menopause: Examination of Optimal Dose and Method of Delivery randomized control trial of 90 women were presented. Results showed that program and treatment satisfaction were high in all groups, adherence to daily practice met or exceeded adherence benchmarks. There were significant reduction of poor sleep quality in all groups with a significant increase in minutes slept in all groups. The majority of women also showed clinical improvements of duration. There were clinically meaningful improvements in reducing the perception of poor sleep quality in 50%-77% of women across time. Overall, the use of self-hypnosis as a treatment program for sleep problems related to menopause was acceptable for women. Data further support that hypnosis is a promising technique to improve sleep in menopausal women with sleep and hot flashes. Further research is ongoing on self-hypnosis delivery and implementation into wider populations of women using clear definition and control groups.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Congresses as Topic; Female; Hot Flashes; Humans; Hypnosis; Menopause; Middle Aged; Sleep; Sleep Wake Disorders
PubMed: 32186967
DOI: 10.1089/jwh.2020.8327 -
Trials Apr 2020Different non-pharmacological techniques, including hypnosis and virtual reality (VR) are currently used as complementary tools in the treatment of anxiety, acute and... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
BACKGROUND
Different non-pharmacological techniques, including hypnosis and virtual reality (VR) are currently used as complementary tools in the treatment of anxiety, acute and chronic pain. A new technique called virtual reality hypnosis (VRH), which encompasses a combination of both tools, is regularly used although its benefits and underlying mechanisms remain unknown to date. With the goal to improve our understanding of VRH combination effects, it is necessary to conduct randomised and controlled research trials in order to understand their clinical interest and potential benefits.
METHODS
Patients (n = 100) undergoing cardiac surgery at the Liège University Hospital will be randomly assigned to one of four conditions (control, hypnosis, VR or VRH). Each patient will receive two sessions of one of the techniques: one the day before the surgery and one the day after. Physiological assessments will be made on the monitor and patients will rate their levels of anxiety, fatigue, pain, absorption and dissociation.
DISCUSSION
This study will help to expand knowledge on the application of virtual reality, hypnosis and VRH in the specific context of cardiac and intensive care procedures, and the influence of these non-pharmacological techniques on patient's anxiety, fatigue, pain and phenomenological experience.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03820700. Date registered on 29 January 2019. Study recruitment date: October 6, 2018. Study anticipated completion date: December 28, 2020.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anxiety; Belgium; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Case-Control Studies; Fatigue; Feasibility Studies; Female; Humans; Hypnosis; Intensive Care Units; Male; Middle Aged; Pain; Prospective Studies; Virtual Reality; Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy
PubMed: 32293517
DOI: 10.1186/s13063-020-4222-6 -
Revista Latino-americana de Enfermagem Dec 2017
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus; Humans; Hypnosis
PubMed: 29211191
DOI: 10.1590/1518-8345.0000.2868 -
Ugeskrift For Laeger Sep 2018
Topics: Abdominal Pain; Adolescent; Child; Cognitive Behavioral Therapy; Humans; Hypnosis; Irritable Bowel Syndrome
PubMed: 30259836
DOI: No ID Found -
Cerebellum (London, England) Dec 2022Hypnotisability is a multidimensional trait predicting the proneness to enter hypnosis and/or accept suggestions and is associated with several psychophysiological... (Review)
Review
Hypnotisability is a multidimensional trait predicting the proneness to enter hypnosis and/or accept suggestions and is associated with several psychophysiological correlates. This scoping review reports the differences between individuals with high (highs) and low hypnotizability (lows) in the left cerebellar lobules IV-VI grey matter volume, in the excitability of the right motor cortex and in motor and non-motor functions in which the cerebellum may be involved. A reduced cerebellar inhibition may explain the greater excitability of the highs' right motor cortex. The latter may be involved in their greater proneness to ideomotor behaviour following sensorimotor suggestions. The associated experience of involuntariness and effortlessness could be due to the motor cortex greater excitability as well as to activation of a specific cerebellar-parietal circuit. Looser postural and visuomotor control with no learning across trials and greater attentional stability can be accounted for by a less accurate cerebellar predictive model of information processing. The highs' stronger functional equivalence between imagery and perception/action and greater motor excitability may be involved in the highs' greater proneness to respond to emotional stimuli. Paradoxical pain control may depend on reduced cortical inhibition of the pain matrix by the cerebellum. Cerebellar hypotheses are not alternative to other physiological mechanisms and should be tested in future research.
Topics: Humans; Hypnosis; Inhibition, Psychological; Cerebellum; Attention; Pain
PubMed: 34652583
DOI: 10.1007/s12311-021-01292-1 -
PsyCh Journal Mar 2019Mindfulness meditation and hypnosis are related in opposing ways to awareness of intentions. The cold control theory of hypnosis proposes that hypnotic responding... (Review)
Review
Mindfulness meditation and hypnosis are related in opposing ways to awareness of intentions. The cold control theory of hypnosis proposes that hypnotic responding involves the experience of involuntariness while performing an actually intentional action. Hypnosis therefore relies upon inaccurate metacognition about intentional actions and experiences. Mindfulness meditation centrally involves awareness of intentions and is associated with improved metacognitive access to intentions. Therefore, mindfulness meditators and highly hypnotizable people may lie at opposite ends of a spectrum with regard to metacognitive access to intention-related information. Here we review the theoretical background and evidence for differences in the metacognition of intentions in these groups, as revealed by chronometric measures of the awareness of voluntary action: the timing of an intention to move (Libet's "W" judgments) and the compressed perception of time between an intentional action and its outcome ("intentional binding"). We review these measures and critically evaluate their proposed connection to the experience of volition and sense of agency.
Topics: Humans; Hypnosis; Intention; Meditation; Metacognition; Mindfulness; Time Perception
PubMed: 30912626
DOI: 10.1002/pchj.276 -
Complementary Therapies in Medicine May 2022Hypnotherapy is increasingly used in general medicine in France to manage health problems such as insomnia. There is some evidence to support the efficacy of hypnosis in... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Hypnotherapy is increasingly used in general medicine in France to manage health problems such as insomnia. There is some evidence to support the efficacy of hypnosis in treating insomnia but this evidence is based on methodologies of various strengths. This review aims to explore the methodological elements employed in hypnotherapy research to manage insomnia.
METHOD
We performed a narrative review of the literature using systematic review methods focusing on treating insomnia with hypnosis. PubMed, Psycinfo, BASE and Cochrane databases and Google scholar were searched.
RESULTS
Overall, 25 studies were included consisting of 10 case studies, 11 randomised, controlled trials and 4 pre and post intervention studies. The study designs, intervention, control and comparators were heterogeneous, as were the hypnosis definitions and techniques. Also, detailed descriptions of the hypnosis techniques were lacking. Most studies used non-quantifiable measurement criteria and sample numbers were too small to show significance or be representative. No double-blind study was found.
CONCLUSION
Our results indicate that the current research concerning the efficacy of hypnosis to relieve insomnia is lacking in key methodological elements. The evaluation research process requires robust methodology. We propose applying the IDEAL framework, which recommends research steps to evaluate non-pharmacological and other complex therapies to evaluate the efficacy of hypnosis to manage insomnia.
Topics: Databases, Factual; France; Humans; Hypnosis; Research Design; Sleep Initiation and Maintenance Disorders
PubMed: 35074550
DOI: 10.1016/j.ctim.2022.102805