Laser-induced pain-related brain potentials and sensory pain ratings in high and low hypnotizable subjects during hypnotic suggestions of relaxation, dissociated imagery, focused analgesia, and placebo

Neuroscientific results of experimental studies on the control of acute pain with hypnosis and suggested analgesia

This narrative review summarizes a representative collection of electrophysiological and imaging studies on the neural processes and brain sources underlying hypnotic trance and the effects of hypnotic suggestions on the processing of experimentally induced painful events. It complements several reviews on the effect of hypnosis on brain processes and structures of chronic pain processing. Based on a summary of previous findings on the neuronal processing of experimentally applied pain stimuli and their effects on neuronal brain structures in healthy subjects, three neurophysiological methods are then presented that examine which of these neuronal processes and structures get demonstrably altered by hypnosis and can thus be interpreted as neuronal signatures of the effect of analgesic suggestions: (A) On a more global neuronal level, these are electrical processes of the brain that can be recorded from the cranial surface of the brain with magnetoencephalography (MEG) and electroencephalography (EEG). (B) On a second level, so-called evoked (EPs) or event-related potentials (ERPs) are discussed, which represent a subset of the brain electrical parameters of the EEG. (C) Thirdly, imaging procedures are summarized that focus on brain structures involved in the processing of pain states and belong to the main imaging procedures of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI/fMRI) and positron emission tomography (PET). Finally, these different approaches are summarized in a discussion, and some research and methodological suggestions are made as to how this research could be improved in the future.

The effect of experimental emotion induction on experimental pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

ABSTRACT

The idea that emotions can influence pain is generally recognized. However, a synthesis of the numerous individual experimental studies on this subject is lacking. The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to synthesize the existing evidence on the effect of experimental emotion induction on experimental pain in nonclinical adults. PsycInfo and PubMed were searched up until April 10, 2023, for studies assessing differences in self-reported pain between emotion induction groups and/or control groups or between conditions within group. Risk of bias was assessed for the individual studies. The literature search yielded 78 relevant records of 71 independent studies. When compared with control conditions, the pooled results revealed a statistically significant pain-attenuating effect of positive emotion induction (between-group: Hedges g = -0.48, 95% CI: -0.72; -0.25, K = 9; within-group: g = -0.24, 95% CI: -0.32; -0.15, K = 40), and a statistically significant pain-exacerbating effect of negative emotion induction in within-group analyses but not between-group analyses (between-group: g = -0.29, 95% CI: -0.66; 0.07, K = 10; within-group: g = 0.14, 95% CI: 0.06; 0.23, K = 39). Bayesian meta-analysis provided strong support for an effect of positive emotion induction but weak support for an effect of negative emotion induction. Taken together, the findings indicate a pain-attenuating effect of positive emotion induction, while the findings for negative emotion induction are less clear. The findings are discussed with reference to theoretical work emphasizing the role of motivational systems and distraction for pain. Limitations include considerable heterogeneity across studies limiting the generalizability of the findings.

Spinal and supraspinal modulation of pain responses by hypnosis, suggestions, and distraction

The mechanisms underlying pain modulation by hypnosis and the contribution of hypnotic induction to the efficacy of suggestions being still under debate, our study aimed, (1) to assess the effects of identical hypoalgesia suggestions given with and without hypnotic induction, (2) to compare hypnotic hypoalgesia to distraction hypoalgesia and (3) to evaluate whether hypnotic suggestions of increased and decreased pain share common psychophysiological mechanisms. To this end, pain ratings, nociceptive flexion reflex amplitude, autonomic responses and electroencephalographic activity were measured in response to noxious electrical stimulation of the sural nerve in 20 healthy participants, who were subjected to four conditions: suggestions of hypoalgesia delivered with and without hypnosis induction (i.e. hypnotic-hypoalgesia and suggested-hypoalgesia), distraction by a mental calculation task and hypnotic suggestions of hyperalgesia. As a result, pain ratings decreased in distraction, suggested-hypoalgesia and hypnotic-hypoalgesia, while it increased in hypnotic-hyperalgesia. Nociceptive flexion reflex amplitude and autonomic activity decreased during suggested-hypoalgesia and hypnotic-hypoalgesia but increased during distraction and hypnotic-hyperalgesia. Hypnosis did not enhance the effects of suggestions significantly in any measurement. No somatosensory-evoked potential was modulated by the four conditions according to strict statistical criteria. The absence of a significant difference between the hypnotic hypoalgesia and hyperalgesia conditions suggests that brain processes as evidenced by evoked potentials are not invariably related to pain modulation. Time-frequency analysis of electroencephalographic activity showed a significant differentiation between distraction and hypnotic hypoalgesia in the theta domain. These results highlight the diversity of neurophysiological processes underlying pain modulation through different psychological interventions.

Others' Pain Appraisals Modulate the Anticipation and Experience of Subsequent Pain

The present study investigated how pain appraisals from other individuals modulated self-pain anticipation and perception. Appraisals of pain intensity from 10 other individuals were presented before the participants received identical electrical pain stimulation themselves. In reality, the presented other's pain appraisals, with either low or high in mean and variance, were generated by the experimenter, and were randomly paired with the subsequent electrical stimulation at either low or high intensity. Specifically, the mean and variance of others' pain appraisals were manipulated to induce participants' expectation and certainty to the upcoming pain. Subjective ratings of pain intensity and electroencephalographic (EEG) responses to the electrical stimulation, as well as anticipatory EEG activities measured prior to the onset of electrical stimulation, were compared. Results showed that the mean and variance of others' pain appraisal modulated the subjective pain ratings and the affective-motivational P2 responses elicited by the electrical stimulation, as well as anticipatory sensorimotor α-oscillation measured before the onset of pain stimulation. When the mean of others' pain appraisal was low, higher variance suppressed the sensorimotor α-oscillations and enhanced subsequent pain perception. In contrast, when the mean was high, the higher variance enhanced sensorimotor α-oscillations and suppressed subsequent pain perception. These results demonstrated that others' pain appraisals can modulate both of the anticipation and perception of first-hand pain. It also suggested that the top-down modulation of others' pain appraisals on pain perception could be partially driven by the different brain states during the anticipation stage, as captured by the prestimulus sensorimotor α-oscillations.

Hypnotizability and Placebo Analgesia in Waking and Hypnosis as Modulators of Auditory Startle Responses in Healthy Women: An ERP Study

We evaluated the influence of hypnotizability, pain expectation, placebo analgesia in waking and hypnosis on tonic pain relief. We also investigated how placebo analgesia affects somatic responses (eye blink) and N100 and P200 waves of event-related potentials (ERPs) elicited by auditory startle probes. Although expectation plays an important role in placebo and hypnotic analgesia, the neural mechanisms underlying these treatments are still poorly understood. We used the cold cup test (CCT) to induce tonic pain in 53 healthy women. Placebo analgesia was initially produced by manipulation, in which the intensity of pain induced by the CCT was surreptitiously reduced after the administration of a sham analgesic cream. Participants were then tested in waking and hypnosis under three treatments: (1) resting (Baseline); (2) CCT-alone (Pain); and (3) CCT plus placebo cream for pain relief (Placebo). For each painful treatment, we assessed pain and distress ratings, eye blink responses, N100 and P200 amplitudes. We used LORETA analysis of N100 and P200 waves, as elicited by auditory startle, to identify cortical regions sensitive to pain reduction through placebo and hypnotic analgesia. Higher pain expectation was associated with higher pain reductions. In highly hypnotizable participants placebo treatment produced significant reductions of pain and distress perception in both waking and hypnosis condition. P200 wave, during placebo analgesia, was larger in the frontal left hemisphere while placebo analgesia, during hypnosis, involved the activity of the left hemisphere including the occipital region. These findings demonstrate that hypnosis and placebo analgesia are different processes of top-down regulation. Pain reduction was associated with larger EMG startle amplitudes, N100 and P200 responses, and enhanced activity within the frontal, parietal, and anterior and posterior cingulate gyres. LORETA results showed that placebo analgesia modulated pain-responsive areas known to reflect the ongoing pain experience.

Hypnotic relaxation results in elevated thresholds of sensory detection but not of pain detection

Background

Many studies show an effectiveness of hypnotic analgesia. It has been discussed whether the analgesic effect is mainly caused by the relaxation that is concomitant to hypnosis. This study was designed to evaluate the effects of hypnotic relaxation suggestion on different somatosensory detection and pain thresholds.

Methods

Quantitative sensory testing (QST) measurements were performed before and during hypnosis in twenty-three healthy subjects on the dorsum of the right hand. Paired t-test was used to compare threshold changes. The influence of hypnotic susceptibility was evaluated by calculating correlation coefficients for threshold changes and hypnotic susceptibility (Harvard group scale).

Results

During hypnosis significantly changed somatosensory thresholds (reduced function) were observed for the following sensory detection thresholds: Cold Detection Threshold (CDT), Warm Detection Threshold (WDT), Thermal Sensory Limen (TSL) and Mechanical Detection Threshold (MDT). The only unchanged sensory detection threshold was Vibration Detection Threshold (VDT). No significant changes were observed for the determined pain detection thresholds (Cold Pain Thresholds, Heat Pain Thresholds, Mechanical Pain Sensitivity, Dynamic Mechanical Allodynia, Wind-up Ratio and Pressure Pain Threshold). No correlation of hypnotic susceptibility and threshold changes were detected.

Conclusion

Hypnotic relaxation without a specific analgesic suggestion results in thermal and mechanical detection, but not pain threshold changes. We thus conclude that a relaxation suggestion has no genuine effect on sensory pain thresholds.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02261155 (9^th October 2014).

Measured outcomes with hypnosis as an experimental tool in a cardiovascular physiology laboratory

The authors detail their multidisciplinary collaboration of cardiologists, physiologists, neurologists, psychologists, engineers, and statisticians in researching the effects of hypnosis on the cardiovascular system and their additions to that incomplete literature. The article details their results and provides guidelines for researchers interested in replicating their research on hypnosis' effect on the cardiovascular system.

Hypnosis and surgery: past, present, and future

Hypnosis has been defined as the induction of a subjective state in which alterations of perception or memory can be elicited by suggestion. Ever since the first public demonstrations of "animal magnetism" by Mesmer in the 18th century, the use of this psychological tool has fascinated the medical community and public alike. The application of hypnosis to alter pain perception and memory dates back centuries. Yet little progress has been made to fully comprehend or appreciate its potential compared to the pharmacologic advances in anesthesiology. Recently, hypnosis has aroused interest, as hypnosis seems to complement and possibly enhance conscious sedation. Contemporary clinical investigators claim that the combination of analgesia and hypnosis is superior to conventional pharmacologic anesthesia for minor surgical cases, with patients and surgeons responding favorably. Simultaneously, basic research of pain pathways involving the nociceptive flexion reflex and positron emission tomography has yielded objective data regarding the physiologic correlates of hypnosis. In this article I review the history, basic scientific and clinical studies, and modern practical considerations of one of the oldest therapeutical tools: the power of suggestion.

Hypnosis prevents the cardiovascular response to cold pressor test

To highlight the effects of hypnotic focused analgesia (HFA), 20 healthy participants underwent a cold pressor test (CPT) in waking basal conditions (WBC) by keeping the right hand in icy water until tolerable (pain tolerance); subjective pain was quantified by visual scale immediately before extracting the hand from water. The test was then repeated while the participants were under hypnosis and underwent HFA suggestions. Cardiovascular parameters were continuously monitored. Pain tolerance was 121.5+/-96.1 sec in WBC and 411.0+/-186.7 sec during HFA (p < 0.0001), and visual rating score 7.75+/-2.29 and 2.45+/-2.98 (p < 0.0001), respectively. CPT-induced increase of total peripheral resistance was non significant during HFA and +21% (p < 0.01) in WBC. HFA therefore reduced both perception and the reflex cardiovascular consequences of pain as well. This indicates that hypnotic analgesia implies a decrease of sensitivity and/or a block of transmission of painful stimuli, with depression of the nervous reflex arc.

Perception and modulation of pain in waking and hypnosis: functional significance of phase-ordered gamma oscillations

Somatosensory event-related phase-ordered gamma oscillations (40-Hz) to electric painful standard stimuli under an odd-ball paradigm were analyzed in 13 high, 13 medium, and 12 low hypnotizable subjects during waking, hypnosis, and post-hypnosis conditions. During these conditions, subjects received a suggestion of Focused Analgesia to produce an obstructive hallucination of stimulus perception; a No-Analgesia treatment served as a control. After hypnosis, a post-hypnotic suggestion was given to draw waking subjects into a deep hypnosis with opened eyes. High hypnotizables, compared to medium and low ones, experienced significant pain and distress reductions for Focused Analgesia during hypnosis and, to a greater extent, during post-hypnosis condition. Correlational analysis of EEG sweeps of each individual revealed brief intervals of phase ordering of gamma patterns, preceding and following stimulus onset, lasting approximately six periods. High and medium hypnotizable subjects showed significant reductions in phase-ordered gamma patterns for Focused Analgesia during hypnosis and post-hypnosis conditions; this effect was found, however, more pronounced in high hypnotizable subjects. Phase-ordered gamma scores over central scalp site predicted subject pain ratings across Waking-Pain and Waking-Analgesia conditions, while phase-ordered gamma scores over frontal scalp site predicted pain ratings during post-hypnosis analgesia condition. During waking conditions, this relationship was present in high, low and medium hypnotizable subjects and was independent of stimulus intensity measures. This relationship was unchanged by hypnosis induction in the low hypnotizable subjects, but not present in the high and medium ones during hypnosis, suggesting that hypnosis interferes with phase-ordered gamma and pain relationship.

Hypnosis and clinical pain

Hypnosis has been demonstrated to reduce analogue pain, and studies on the mechanisms of laboratory pain reduction have provided useful applications to clinical populations. Studies showing central nervous system activity during hypnotic procedures offer preliminary information concerning possible physiological mechanisms of hypnotic analgesia. Randomized controlled studies with clinical populations indicate that hypnosis has a reliable and significant impact on acute procedural pain and chronic pain conditions. Methodological issues of this body of research are discussed, as are methods to better integrate hypnosis into comprehensive pain treatment.

Differential effectiveness of psychological interventions for reducing osteoarthritis pain: a comparison of Erikson [correction of Erickson] hypnosis and Jacobson relaxation

The present study investigates the effectiveness of Erikson hypnosis and Jacobson relaxation for the reduction of osteoarthritis pain. Participants reporting pain from hip or knee osteoarthritis were randomly assigned to one of the following conditions: (a) hypnosis (i.e. standardized eight-session hypnosis treatment); (b) relaxation (i.e. standardized eight sessions of Jacobson's relaxation treatment); (c) control (i.e. waiting list). Overall, results show that the two experimental groups had a lower level of subjective pain than the control group and that the level of subjective pain decreased with time. An interaction effect between group treatment and time measurement was also observed in which beneficial effects of treatment appeared more rapidly for the hypnosis group. Results also show that hypnosis and relaxation are effective in reducing the amount of analgesic medication taken by participants. Finally, the present results suggest that individual differences in imagery moderate the effect of the psychological treatment at the 6 month follow-up but not at previous times of measurement (i.e. after 4 weeks of treatment, after 8 weeks of treatment and at the 3 month follow-up). The results are interpreted in terms of psychological processes underlying hypnosis, and their implications for the psychological treatment of pain are discussed.

Somatosensory event-related potential and autonomic activity to varying pain reduction cognitive strategies in hypnosis

OBJECTIVES

The issues of differential effects among cognitive strategies during hypnosis in the control of human pain are under active debate. This study, which employs measures of pain perception, electrocortical and autonomic responses, was aimed at determining these pain-related modulations.

METHODS

Somatosensory event-related potentials (SERPs) to noxious stimuli under an odd-ball paradigm were recorded at the frontal, temporal and parietal regions in 10 high, 9 mid, and 10 low hypnotizable right-handed young women, at waking baseline, varying cognitive strategies (deep relaxation, dissociative imagery, focused analgesia) in hypnosis and placebo conditions. The phasic heart rate (HR) and skin conductance response were also recorded. The analysis was focused on the frequent standard trials of the odd-ball SERPs. Repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted to examine the experimental effects.

RESULTS

Focused analgesia induced the largest reduction in pain rating, more in the high than low hypnotizable subjects. In high hypnotizable subjects, the N2 amplitude was greater over frontal and temporal scalp sites than over parietal and central sites, whereas in moderately and low hypnotizable subjects, N2 was greater over temporal sites than over frontal, parietal, and central sites. These subjects also displayed a larger N2 peak over temporal sites during focused analgesia than in the other conditions. The P3 amplitude was smaller under deep relaxation, dissociative imagery and focused analgesia in the high hypnotizable subjects. For these subjects, the smallest P3 peaks were obtained for dissociated imagery and focused analgesia over frontal and temporal sites. In contrast, for the P3 peak, low hypnotizable subjects failed to show significant condition effects. In all of the subjects, the skin conductance and HR were smaller during hypnotic suggestions than in the waking state.

CONCLUSIONS

The effect of pain modulation is limited to high hypnotizable subjects rather than low hypnotizable ones. Higher frontal-temporal N2 and smaller posterior parietal P3 may indicate active inhibitory processes during cognitive strategies in hypnotic analgesia. These inhibitory processes also regulate the autonomic activities in pain perception.

Local and remote effects of hypnotic suggestions of analgesia

The present study was designed to further characterize hypnotic analgesia and particularly to examine whether the effects are due to a selective alteration of pain perception and are organized somatotopically. Thirty-two healthy volunteers participated in this study. Thermal detection thresholds for warmth and cool stimuli and heat pain thresholds were measured at both the upper and lower left limbs by means of a thermotest. Measurements were performed before, during and after a hypnotic session during which the subjects were administered a French adaptation of the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale and then standardized suggestions of analgesia limited to the left foot. Heat pain thresholds were significantly increased at both the lower and upper limbs. Changes at the foot were positively correlated with the hypnotic susceptibility score, while, unexpectedly, changes at the hand were negatively correlated with the susceptibility score. Mean detection thresholds for warmth and cool stimuli were also altered at both the lower and upper limbs during hypnosis, but these modifications were correlated neither with susceptibility nor with the changes in heat pain threshold. These results indicate that hypnotic suggestions can selectively and somatotopically alter pain sensation in highly susceptible subjects. It is also suggested, however, that suggestions of analgesia can induce selective alterations of pain perception in poorly susceptible subjects, although these effects did not appear to be localized 'appropriately'.

Korrelate der kortikalen Schmerzverarbeitung - eine Übersicht

Zusammenfassung: Schmerz ist ein kompliziertes Resultat verschiedener neuronaler Aktivitäten unseres Gehirns und nicht nur das einfache Ergebnis der Tätigkeit des peripheren nozizeptiven Systems. Schmerz resultiert aus dem Zusammenspiel verschiedener Module im Gehirn, die sich in verschiedenen Hirnarealen befinden. Er wird durch Erwartungen, Lernprozesse, Erfahrungen und Coping modifiziert. Elektrophysiologische Begleiterscheinungen, die mit der zentralnervösen Schmerzverarbeitung assoziiert sind, erlauben dabei eine Charakterisierung der ablaufenden Informationsverarbeitungsprozesse. Neben der grundlagentheoretischen Bedeutung spielt hier die Evaluation verschiedener Therapieansätze eine herausragende Rolle. Darüber hinaus konnte mit Hilfe der Hirnelektrizität nachgewiesen werden, daß auch die kortikalen Module des nozizeptiven Systems im Zusammenhang mit Schmerzverarbeitung funktionell reorganisiert werden. Die relativ neuen quellenanalytischen Ansätze lassen einen weiteren, deutlichen Erkenntnisgewinn über die Rolle einzelner Hirnstrukturen bei der Verarbeitung und Behandlung von Schmerz erwarten.

Pain perception, somatosensory event-related potentials and skin conductance responses to painful stimuli in high, mid, and low hypnotizable subjects: effects of differential pain reduction strategies

In this study, pain perception, somatosensory event-related potential (SERP) and skin conductance response (SCR) changes during hypnotic suggestions of Deep Relaxation, Dissociated Imagery, Focused Analgesia, and Placebo, compared with a Waking baseline condition, were investigated. SERPs were recorded from frontal, temporal, central, and parietal scalp sites. Ten high, 9 mid, and 10 low hypnotizable right-handed women participated in the experiment. The following measures were obtained: (1) pain and distress tolerance ratings; (2) sensory and pain thresholds to biphasic electrical stimulation delivered to the right wrist; (3) reaction time and number of omitted responses; (4) N2 (280+/-11 ms) and P3 (405+/-19 ms) peak amplitudes of SERPs to target stimuli delivered using an odd-ball paradigm; (5) number of evoked SCRs and SCR amplitudes as a function of stimulus repetition. Results showed, high, mid and low hypnotizables exhibited significant reductions of reported pain and distress ratings during conditions of Deep Relaxation/Suggestion of Analgesia, Dissociated Imagery and Focused Analgesia. High hypnotizable subjects displayed significant reductions in pain and distress levels compared to mid and low hypnotizables during Dissociated Imagery, Focused Analgesia and, to a lesser degree, during Deep Relaxation. Placebo condition did not display significant differences among hypnotizability groups. High hypnotizables, compared to mid and low hypnotizables, also showed significant increases in sensory and pain thresholds during Dissociated Imagery and Focused Analgesia. High, mid, and low groups showed significant reductions in P3 peak amplitudes across all hypnosis conditions and, to a lesser degree, during Placebo. The temporal cortical region was the most sensitive in differentiating SERP responses among hypnotizability groups. On this recording area the subjects highly susceptible to hypnosis displayed significantly smaller P3 and greater N2 peaks during Focused Analgesia than did the other hypnotizable groups. In this condition highly susceptible subjects also reported the highest number of omitted responses and the shortest Reaction Times. These subjects also showed faster habituation of SCRs when compared with mid and low hypnotizables. During Dissociated Imagery and Focused Analgesia, highly hypnotizable subjects also disclosed a smaller total number of evoked SCRs than did mid and low hypnotizable subjects. The results are discussed considering possible common and different mechanisms to account for the effects of different hypnotic suggestions.

Complementary and alternative medicine and psychologic factors: toward an individual differences model of complementary and alternative medicine use and outcomes

CONTEXT

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is in widespread use. Study of the psychologic factors associated with CAM use may provide descriptions of subgroups of health care consumers and give further insight into the reasons for using alternative therapies.

OBJECTIVES

To see if the use of CAM is associated with psychologic factors in two outpatient samples and one community sample.

SETTING

The University of Virginia Hospital and Charlottesville community.

PATIENTS

Patients at the Cancer Center (60) and Pain Management Center (63) and adults from the Charlottesville community (63) for a total of 186 participants.

DESIGN

A survey of CAM with psychologic assessment.

MAIN MEASURES

Level of CAM use, effectiveness ratings of CAM, positive affect, negative affect, and the Absorption Scale, which measures a personality factor associated with the capacity for focused attention and mind-body awareness.

RESULTS

Participants using six or fewer CAM scored an average of 13.9 on the Absorption Scale compared to participants using seven or more CAM, who scored an average of 21.4 on Absorption (F = 48.73, p < .0001). Higher effectiveness ratings of CAM were associated with greater positive affect. Pain Center patients rated alternative therapies as least effective, and reported lower positive affect and greater negative affect compared with the Cancer Center patients and community adults.

CONCLUSIONS

Above average use of CAM is associated with higher education, greater well-being and higher Absorption. The personality traits associated with alternative therapies are compatible with participation in these therapies and may facilitate the capacity to benefit from them.

Psychophysiological correlates of hypnosis and hypnotic susceptibility

This article reviews and summarizes electroencephalographic (EEG)-based research on physiological and cognitive indicators of hypnotic responding and hypnotic susceptibility, with special attention to the author's programmatic research in this area. Evidence that differences in attention levels may account for hypnotic depth and individual differences in hypnotizability is provided with traditional EEG rhythms, event-related potentials, and 40-Hz EEG activity. The alteration of stimulus perception may be a secondary effect with respect to allocation of attentional resources. In both nonhypnosis and hypnosis conditions, high hypnotizables appeared to show greater task-related EEG hemispheric shifts than did low hypnotizables. Findings concerning cognitive and physiological correlates of hypnotic analgesia are discussed with respect to hemispheric functioning in the apparent control of focused and sustained attention. The conclusion is that although a definitive EEG-based signature for hypnosis and hypnotizability is not yet established, there are a number of promising leads.

Responsiveness to direct versus indirect hypnotic procedures: the role of resistance as a predictor variable

Empirical research attempting to demonstrate that indirectly phrased hypnotic suggestions result in greater responsiveness than do direct approaches generally has not shown any differences on formal hypnotizability scales. However, empirical research in related areas along with clinical observation suggests that client resistance might be a crucial moderating variable. Specifically, participants with greater resistance would be expected to be more responsive to indirect approaches, whereas those with low levels of resistance would be more responsive to direct hypnotic procedures. To test this hypothesis, participants were given either a standardized test of hypnotic responsiveness that used direct suggestions (Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotizability) or a comparable indirect scale (Alman Wexler Indirect Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale) followed by administration of a measure of resistance (Therapeutic Reactance Scale). The hypothesis was not confirmed, in that those with higher (or lower) reactance/resistance did not score differently than those on either the indirect or direct hypnotizability measures.

Hypnosis after an adverse response to opioids in an ICU burn patient

OBJECTIVE

Burn injuries produce severe wound care pain that is ideally controlled on intensive burn care units with high-dosage intravenous opioid medications. We report a case illustrating the use of hypnosis for pain management when one opioid medication was ineffective.

SETTING

Intensive burn care unit at a regional trauma center.

PATIENT

A 55-year-old man with an extensive burn suffered from significant respiratory depression from a low dosage of opioid during wound care and also experienced uncontrolled pain.

INTERVENTION

Rapid induction hypnotic analgesia.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Verbal numeric pain scale, and pain and anxiolytic medication usage.

RESULTS

The introduction of hypnosis, supplemented by little or no opioids, resulted in excellent pain control, absence of need for supplemental anxiolytic medication, shortened length of wound care, and a positive staff response over a 14-day period.

CONCLUSIONS

This case illustrates that hypnosis can not only be used easily and quite appropriately in a busy medical intensive care unit environment, but that sometimes this treatment may be a very useful alternative when opioid pain medication proves to be dangerous and ineffective. This case also illustrates possible clinical implications both pain relief and side-effect profiles for opioid receptor specificity. Although this report does not provide data regarding hypnotic mechanisms, it is clear that with some patients nonopioid inhibitory mechanisms can be activated in a highly effective manner, that clinical context may be important for the activation of those pathways, and that those mechanisms may be accessed more easily than opioid mechanisms.

Effects of an opioid antagonist on pain intensity and withdrawal reflexes during induction of hypnotic analgesia in high- and low-hypnotizable volunteers

The aim of this investigation was to study the effect of suggestions of hypnotic analgesia on spinal pain transmission and processing. Pain intensity and amplitude of nociceptive withdrawal reflexes to electrical stimuli were measured in 10 high- and 10 low-hypnotizable subjects during two sessions taking place at least 24 h apart under five conditions of: (1) pre-hypnosis; (2) neutral hypnotic relaxation; (3) suggestions of hypnotic analgesia; (4) suggestions of hypnotic analgesia after injections of either naloxone (1 ml, 1 mg/ml) or saline (1 ml) under double-blinded conditions; and (5) post-hypnosis. The conditions of naloxone or saline were allocated at random to either Day 1 or Day 2 in a double-blinded fashion. Results showed significant reductions of pain intensity during hypnotic analgesia, and a significant reduction in nociceptive reflexes during hypnotic analgesia on Day 1 in the highly hypnotizable group. No differences were found for low-hypnotizable subjects. The results support previous findings that pain intensity as well as the nociceptive reflex can be modulated by suggestions of hypnotic analgesia. While no effect of naloxone on pain intensity was found during hypnotic analgesia, naloxone significantly reversed the suppressive effect of suggestions of hypnotic analgesia on reflexes in high-hypnotizable subjects. Subsequent analysis showed that the effect of naloxone was associated with the intensity of the stimulus needed to elicit a reflex, and was unrelated to hypnotic susceptibility when controlling for stimulus intensity. These results suggest that the effect of naloxone was related to the greater stimulus intensities needed to elicit a reflex in the high-hypnotizable group, rather than to hypnosis or hypnotic susceptibility in itself. It is unclear why greater stimulus intensities were needed in high-hypnotizable subjects and further studies are needed. Copyright 1998 European Federation of Chapters of the International Association for the Study of Pain.

Hypnotic analgesia: a constructivist framework

Hypnotic analgesia remains an enigma. Recent neuroscience studies demonstrate that widespread distributed processing occurs in the brains of individuals experiencing pain. Emerging research and theory on the mechanisms of consciousness, along with this evidence, suggest that a constructivist framework may facilitate both pain research and the study of hypnosis. The authors propose that the brain constructs elements of pain experience (pain schemata) and embeds them in ongoing consciousness. The contents of immediate consciousness feed back to nonconscious, parallel distributed processes to help shape the character of future moments of consciousness. Hypnotic suggestion may interact with such processing through feedback mechanisms that prime associations and memories and thus shape the formation of future experience.

Hypnotic analgesia: 1. Somatosensory event-related potential changes to noxious stimuli and 2. Transfer learning to reduce chronic low back pain

Fifteen adults with chronic low back pain (M = 4 years), age 18 to 43 years (M = 29 years), participated. All but one were moderately to highly hypnotizable (M = 7.87; modified 11-point Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale, Form C [Weitzenhoffer & Hilgard, 1962]), and significantly reduced pain perception following hypnotic analgesia instructions during cold-pressor pain training. In Part 1, somatosensory event-related potential correlates of noxious electrical stimulation were evaluated during attend and hypnotic analgesia (HA) conditions at anterior frontal (Fp1, Fp2), midfrontal (F3, F4), central (C3, C4), and parietal (P3, P4) regions. During HA, hypothesized inhibitory processing was evidenced by enhanced N140 in the anterior frontal region and by a prestimulus positive-ongoing contingent cortical potential at Fp1 only. During HA, decreased spatiotemporal perception was evidenced by reduced amplitudes of P200 (bilateral midfrontal and central, and left parietal) and P300 (right midfrontal and central). HA led to highly significant mean reductions in perceived sensory pain and distress. HA is an active process that requires inhibitory effort, dissociated from conscious awareness, where the anterior frontal cortex participates in a topographically specific inhibitory feedback circuit that cooperates in the allocation of thalamocortical activities. In Part 2, the authors document the development of self-efficacy through the successful transfer by participants of newly learned skills of experimental pain reduction to reduction of their own chronic pain. Over three experimental sessions, participants reported chronic pain reduction, increased psychological well-being, and increased sleep quality. The development of "neurosignatures of pain" can influence subsequent pain experiences (Coderre, Katz, Vaccarino, & Melzack, 1993; Melzack, 1993) and may be expanded in size and easily reactivated (Flor & Birbaumer, 1994; Melzack, 1991, 1993). Therefore, hypnosis and other psychological interventions need to be introduced early as adjuncts in medical treatments for onset pain before the development of chronic pain.

Danish norms for the Harvard group scale of hypnotic susceptibility, form A

Norms for a Danish adaptation of the Harvard Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form A (HGSHS:A) are presented. Four samples tested from 1988 to 1991 (n = 166, n = 54, n = 95, and n = 61) were pooled, resulting in an aggregate sample of 376 participants. The normative data were generally congruent with earlier normative studies with regard to score distribution, item difficulty levels, and reliability. Studies using the Danish adaptation of the HGSHS:A as a screening instrument have shown the predictive value of the instrument in a Danish context. Data for a comparable American sample of volunteers (n = 170) tested by the same hypnotist were included in the analysis. A comparison revealed a marked difference for the posthypnotic suggestion item, hinting that cultural differences between the Danish and American samples with regard to expectancies and attitudes toward hypnosis may play a role. Further studies comparing attitudes toward hypnosis across different cultural contexts are needed to clarify this issue.