Hypnosis before diagnostic or therapeutic medical procedures: a systematic review

[The effects of hypnosis by virtual reality on tolerance to flexible bronchoscopy]

INTRODUCTION

Patients often perceive flexible bronchoscopy as an unpleasant procedure. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of virtual reality (VR) hypnosis on tolerance to flexible bronchoscopy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled, monocentric study comparing flexible bronchoscopy with VR-induced hypnosis to the usual procedure. Patient tolerance was evaluated using a visual analogue scale (VAS), the state-trait anxiety inventory (STAI) before and after the procedure and, finally, willingness to repeat the examination under the same conditions (WTR).

RESULTS

Among the 70 patients included, 34 were randomized to the VR hypnosis group and 36 to the control group. There was no difference between the 2 groups in terms of modification of the pre-/post-bronchoscopy VAS for anxiety, pain, cough, choking, nausea and overall discomfort, or modification of the STAI score and WTR. Subgroup analysis among patients who were more anxious before the procedure revealed a trend toward reduced anxiety in the VR hypnosis group.

CONCLUSION

This study did not observe any effect of VR hypnosis on the tolerance of patients during routine flexible bronchoscopy. However, VR hypnosis may be beneficial in patients with higher anxiety score before bronchoscopy, a hypothesis that needs to be confirmed by further studies with a larger number of subjects.

Clinical Hypnosis for Procedural Pain and Distress in Children: A Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Pain and distress are common in children undergoing medical procedures, exposing them to acute and chronic biopsychosocial impairments if inadequately treated. Clinical hypnosis has emerged as a potentially beneficial treatment for children's procedural pain and distress due to evidence of effectiveness and potential superiority to other psychological interventions. However, systematic reviews of clinical hypnosis for children's procedural pain and distress have been predominantly conducted in children undergoing oncology and needle procedures and are lacking in broader pediatric contexts. This scoping review maps the evidence of clinical hypnosis for children's procedural pain and distress across broad pediatric contexts while highlighting knowledge gaps and areas requiring further investigation.

METHODS

Published databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science) and grey literature were searched in addition to hand-searching reference lists and key journals (up to May 2022). Two independent reviewers screened the titles and abstracts of search results followed by a full-text review against eligibility criteria. Articles were included if they involved a clinical hypnosis intervention comprising an induction followed by therapeutic suggestions for pain and distress in children undergoing medical procedures. This review followed the Arksey and O'Malley (2005) methodology and incorporated additional scoping review recommendations by the Joanna Briggs Institute and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 38 eligible studies involving 2,205 children were included after 4,775 articles were screened. Research on clinical hypnosis for children's procedural pain and distress was marked by a lack of fidelity measures and qualitative data as well as by inadequate intervention reporting and high attrition rates. Evidence regarding the safety of clinical hypnosis, pain unpleasantness outcomes, factors influencing outcomes, as well as barriers and facilitators to implementing hypnosis and study procedures was also lacking. Clinical hypnosis has potential benefits for children's procedural pain and distress based on evidence of superiority to control conditions and nonpharmacological interventions (e.g., distraction, acupressure) with moderate to large effect sizes as reported in 76% of studies. However, heterogeneous interventions, contexts, study designs, and populations were identified, and the certainty of the evidence was not evaluated.

CONCLUSIONS

The review suggests potential benefits of clinical hypnosis for children's procedural pain and distress and thus provides a precursor for further systematic reviews and trials investigating the effectiveness of clinical hypnosis. The review also indicates the need to further explore the feasibility, acceptability, implementation, and safety of clinical hypnosis in children undergoing painful procedures. Based on the review, researchers implementing clinical hypnosis should adequately report interventions or use treatment manuals, follow recommended research guidelines, and assess the fidelity of intervention delivery to promote replicating and comparing interventions. The review also highlights common methodological shortcomings of published trials to avoid, such as the lack of implementation frameworks, small sample sizes, inadequate reporting of standard care or control conditions, and limited evidence on pain unpleasantness outcomes.

Mind-Body Interventions for Rehabilitation Medicine: Promoting Wellness, Healing, and Coping with Adversity

Physical medicine providers work to cure organic aspects of disease while simultaneously enhancing quality of life and well-being. Mind-body interventions are evidence-based, cost-effective approaches to serve these aims. This article enhances provider knowledge and acceptance of the most effective and prevalent mind-body modalities: meditation, guided imagery, clinical hypnosis, and biofeedback. The scientific evidence is strongest for mind-body applications for chronic pain, primary headache, cardiac rehabilitation, and cancer rehabilitation, with preliminary evidence for traumatic brain injury and cerebrovascular events. Mind-body interventions are well-tolerated by patients and should be considered part of standard care in physical medicine and rehabilitation settings.

Hypnosis and communication reduce pain and anxiety in peripheral intravenous cannulation: Effect of Language and Confusion on Pain During Peripheral Intravenous Catheterization (KTHYPE), a multicentre randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Clinicians traditionally warn patients of pain before peripheral i.v. cannulation (PIVC). However, using words related to pain or undesirable experiences can result in greater pain and anxiety. The use of positive words can improve pain perception and subjective patient experience. We aimed to compare the effects of three types of communication, including hypnotic communication, on pain, comfort, and anxiety in patients during PIVC.

METHODS

The Effect of Language and Confusion on Pain During Peripheral Intravenous Catheterization (KTHYPE) trial is a randomised, parallel, single-blind, multicentre study of patients undergoing PIVC on the dorsal face of the hand before surgery. Patients from three hospitals were randomly allocated to one of three groups: PIVC performed with a hypnosis technique (hypnosis group), negative connotation (nocebo group), and neutral connotation (neutral group). The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of pain measured with a 0-10 numerical rating scale just after PIVC.

RESULTS

Of the 272 subjects analysed (hypnosis, n=89; nocebo, n=92; neutral, n=91), pain after PIVC was lower in the hypnosis group (mean [standard deviation]; range) (1.5 [1.9]; 0-5) compared with the neutral (3.5 [2.3]; 0-9; P<0.0001) and nocebo groups (3.8 [2.5]; 0-10; P<0.0001). Whilst anxiety was higher and comfort lower before PIVC in the hypnosis group, anxiety decreased and comfort perception increased after PIVC when hypnosis was used.

CONCLUSIONS

This is one of the first well-designed RCTs showing a significant benefit of a hypnosis technique during a routine procedure, such as PIVC. The results could facilitate implementation of hypnosis in daily clinical care.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02662322.

The effectiveness of hypnotic analgesia in the management of procedural pain in minimally invasive procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures under a light conscious sedation perceive pain and anxiety. Hypnosis used together with analgesics has been investigated in numerous studies.

AIMS AND METHODS

To assess the effectiveness of hypnotic analgesia in management of pain, anxiety, analgesic consumption, procedure length and adverse events in adults undergoing minimally invasive procedures. Clinical controlled trials in which hypnosis was used together with pharmacological analgesia compared to pharmacological analgesia alone during invasive procedures were included. Seven databases were searched. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by two reviewers using a standardised instrument for critical appraisal from Joanna Briggs Institute, 'Meta-Analysis of statistics assessment and review Instrument'. Meta-analyses using the review manager version 5.3 software were conducted on procedure length and adverse events. Results for pain, anxiety and analgesics were synthesised in narrative summaries. Conduction of the review adheres to the PRISMA checklist.

RESULTS

Ten studies comprising 1,365 participants were included. A reduction in the consumption of pain medication was found between 21%-86% without aggravating pain intensity and anxiety. In few studies, significant reduction in pain intensity and anxiety was found. Meta-analysis including seven studies revealed a small beneficial effect on reducing procedure length. A meta-analysis on adverse events showed no significant reduction. Statistical heterogeneity was found among the studies included.

CONCLUSION

For patients undergoing invasive procedures, hypnotic analgesia was effective in reducing consumption of analgesics. Only a slight effect was, however, found on experienced anxiety and pain intensity. It did not prolong the procedure and was safe to provide.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Hypnosis is recommended as pain management for adults during invasive procedures. A reduced consumption of pain medication potentially has a major impact on monitoring and observation of patients following the procedure, thus improving patient safety and reducing resource consumption.

Effectiveness of two psychological interventions for pain management, emotional regulation and promotion of quality of life among adult Portuguese men with haemophilia (PSY-HaEMOPEQ): study protocol for a single-centre prospective randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Haemophilia is a bleeding disorder associated with significant pain, emotional distress, quality of life (QoL) impairment and considerable healthcare costs. Psychosocial health and effective pain management are considered essential end points for optimal haemophilia care, but there is a significant gap in evidence-based treatments targeting these outcomes in people with haemophilia (PWH). Psychological interventions are cost-effective in promoting emotional well-being, QoL and pain control, although these have been scarcely used in haemophilia field. This investigation aims to evaluate the effectiveness of two psychological interventions for pain management, emotional regulation and promotion of QoL in PWH.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a single-centre parallel randomised controlled trial conducted at a European Haemophilia Comprehensive Care Centre in Portugal, with five assessment points: baseline (T0), postintervention (T1), 3 (T2), 6 (T3) and 12 (T4) months follow-up. Eligible adult males, with moderate or severe haemophilia A or B will be randomised to experimental (EG) or control (CG) group. Intervention is either cognitive-behavioural therapy (EG1) or hypnosis (EG2), both consisting of four weekly sessions following standardised scripts delivered by trained psychologists. Randomisation will be computer generated, allocation concealment will be guaranteed and outcome assessors will be blind to EG/CG allocation. Main outcomes are pain and haemophilia-related QoL and secondary outcomes include clinical (clotting factor replacement consumption, joint bleeding episodes, analgesic intake) and psychological (pain coping strategies, anxiety, depression, illness perceptions) variables, functional assessment of the joints, inflammatory biomarkers (cytokines, high-sensitivity C reactive protein) and white blood cell count.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the competent authorities and all procedures will comply with international ethical guidelines for clinical studies involving humans. Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The dissemination plan includes peer-reviewed scientific publications, conference participation and web and media coverage.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02870452.

A Pragmatic Guide to the Setting up of Integrated Hypnotherapy Services in Primary Care and Clinical Settings

Despite the continued debate and lack of a clear consensus about the true nature of the hypnotic phenomenon, hypnosis is increasingly being utilized successfully in many medical, health, and psychological spheres as a research method, motivational tool, and therapeutic modality. Significantly, however, although hypnotherapy is widely advertised, advocated, and employed in the private medical arena for the management and treatment of many physical and emotional disorders, too little appears to be being done to integrate hypnosis into primary care and national health medical services. This article discusses some of the reasons for the apparent reluctance of medical and scientific health professionals to consider incorporating hypnosis into their medical practice, including the practical problems inherent in using hypnosis in a medical context and some possible solutions.