Hypnosis and Childbirth


The following studies were conducted and highlight ways that hypnosis can be used and the clinical and scientific outcomes.


Study 1: Hypnosis Allows for Less Medication and Less Labor Pains
Hypnosis for Pain Relief in Labor And Childbirth: A Systematic Review.
http://bja.oxfordjournals.org/content/93/4/505.full.pdf

Results: Women who used hypnosis required significantly less pain medication. This study also found that women who used hypnosis reported having less severe labor pains.

Notes: This study reviewed a number of studies where hypnosis was used during pregnancy and childbirth.

British Journal of Anesthesia. 2004 Oct;93(4):505-11. Epub 2004 Jul 26
By: A. M. Cyna, G. L. McAuliffe, M. I. Andrew
Author Affiliations: 1 Department of Women’s Anesthesia, Women’s and Children’s Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia 5006, Australia. 2 Department of Anesthesia, Lyell McEwin Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia


Study 2: Hypnosis – To Shorten Labor, Reduce medication to control pain or to lengthen pregnancy if expectant mother goes into labor too early
Evidence-Based Clinical Hypnosis in Obstetrics, Labor and Delivery, and Preterm Labor.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17558723

Results: The authors report that the use of hypnosis has been proven to shorten Stage 1 and 2 of labour, while also leading to a significant reduction in the use of medication to control the pain. The authors also note that hypnosis has been used to significantly prolong the length of pregnancy when an expectant mother goes into labour too early.

Notes: This paper reviews various academic studies conducted on the use of hypnosis in labour and delivery.

Int Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Vol. 55, No. 3, July 2007
By: D. Brown, D. C. Hammond, Private Practice, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada


Study 3: Hypnosis – Infertility
Infertility and Pregnancy Loss: Hypnotic Interventions for Reproductive Challenges. Healing from within: The use of hypnosis in women’s health care (pp. 191-212)2000.
http://psycnet.apa.org/books/10377/009

Notes: This study reports on the use of hypnosis and imagery-based techniques to help women feel more empowered when dealing with miscarriages and infertility. Based on 15 years of experience in this field, the author concludes that hypnosis can really help at three points in the infertility process. First, it can bring a greater acceptance of the diagnosis. Second, it can help the patient cope more easily with infertility treatments. And third, it can help them to deal with any miscarriages.

By: Susan G. Mikesell


Study 4: Hypnosis – To Help Embryo Transfer at Fertility Clinic
Impact of Hypnosis During Embryo Transfer on the Outcome of In Vitro Fertilization-Embryo Transfer: A Case-Control Study.
http://www.nwmedicalhypnosis.com/documents/Impact%20of%20hypnosis%20during%20embryo%20transfer.pdf

Results: Those who received hypnosis had a 30.2% implantation rate compared with only 14.4% in the control group. This study concluded that not only did hypnosis help to double the rate of embryonic implantation, but it also helped to improve the subject’s attitude towards fertility treatment.

Notes: This study compared two groups of women undergoing embryo transfer (ET) at an Israeli fertility clinic. Ninety-eight women used hypnosis to help them during this process and 96 acted as the control group and followed the normal procedures. During the pre-hypnosis session, every patient was requested to choose a very pleasant life experience to relive. The hypnotic state was induced by the same hypnosis therapist using eye fixation, relaxation, and permissive and indirect suggestions. It was suggested that the patient compare the procedure of ET with the reception of long-awaited and very welcome guests. Only when the patient was thought to be at an adequate trance level (approx.. 10 minutes) was the ET procedure initiated. After ET, and previous to dehypnotization, the patient was given posthypnotic suggestions to produce calm, relaxation, and optimism for the future.

Fertility and Sterility. 2006 May
E. Levitas, A. Parmet, E. Lunenfeld, Y. Bentov, E. Burstein, M. Friger, G. Potashnik
Author Affiliations: a Fertility and IVF Unit, b Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Soroka University Medical Center, and c Department of Epidemiology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel


Study 5: Self-Hypnosis for Labor and Childbirth
Antenatal self-hypnosis for labour and childbirth: A pilot study
http://digital.library.adelaide.edu.au/dspace/handle/2440/23183

Results: Seventy-seven antenatal women consecutively taught self-hypnosis in preparation for childbirth were compared with 3,249 parity and gestational age matched controls. Of the women taught antenatal self-hypnosis, nulliparous parturients used fewer epidurals: 36% (18/50) compared with 53% (765/1436) of controls (RR 0.68 [95% CI 0.47-0.98]); and required less augmentation: 18% (9/50) vs 36% (523/1436) (RR 0.48 [95%CI 0.27-0.90]). Conclusions: Our clinical findings are consistent with recent meta-analyses showing beneficial outcomes associated with the use of hypnosis in childbirth.

Notes: The institute where this study took place had used antenatal training in self-hypnosis for over three years as a tool to provide relaxation, anxiolysis and analgesia for women in labor. To assess the effects of hypnotherapy, they prospectively collected data related to the use of hypnosis in preparation for childbirth, and compared the birth outcomes of women experiencing antenatal hypnosis with parity and gestational age matched controls. Methods: Prospective data about women taught self-hypnosis in preparation for childbirth were collected between August 2002 and August 2004. Birth outcome data of women using hypnosis were compared with routinely collected retrospective data from parity and gestational age matched women delivering after 37 weeks gestation during 2003.

Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, 2006; 34 (4):464-469
By: Allan Michael Cyna, Marion I. Andrew, Georgina L. McAuliffe


Study 6: Effect of Hypnosis on Labor and Birth Outcomes (focuses on pregnant adolescents)
The Effects of Hypnosis on the Labor Processes and Birth Outcomes of Pregnant Adolescents
http://www.fourseas.co.uk/chipreg/researchpregnancy.html
Submitted, revised, February 13, 2001. Journal of Family Practice
By: Alice A. Martin, PhD; Paul G. Schauble, PhD; Surekha H. Rai, PhD; R. Whit Curry Jr, MD, Gainesville, Florida

Results: When labor and delivery outcome measures were compared in the 2 groups, significant differences favoring the hypnosis intervention group were found in the number of complicated deliveries, surgical procedures, and length of hospital stay. Only one patient in the hypnosis group had a hospital stay of more than 2 days compared with 8 patients in the control group (P=.008). None of the 22 patients in the hypnosis group experienced surgical intervention compared with 12 of the 20 patients in the control group (P=.000). Twelve patients in the hypnosis group experienced complications compared with 17 in the control group (P=.047). Although consistently fewer patients in the hypnosis group used anesthesia (10 vs 14), Pitocin (2 vs 6), or postpartum medication (7 vs 11), and fewer had infants admitted to the NICU (1 vs 5), statistical analysis was non-significant. This study provides support for the use of hypnosis to aid in preparation of obstetric patients for labor and delivery. The reduction of complications, surgery, and hospital stay show direct medical benefit to mother and child and suggest the potential for a corresponding cost-saving benefit.

Notes: This study evaluated how childbirth preparation incorporating hypnotic techniques affected the labor processes and birth outcomes of pregnant adolescents. The study included 42 teenaged patients receiving prenatal treatment at a county public health department before their 24th week of pregnancy. They were randomly assigned to either a treatment group receiving a childbirth preparation protocol under hypnosis or a control group receiving supportive counseling. The hypnosis focused on the educational preparation of the patient while in hypnosis to create the expectation of a normal labor and delivery, develop a conditioned response of comfort and confidence, and facilitate an increased sense of control in achieving a healthy delivery. The subjects in the treatment group received a 4-session sequence of standard hypnotic interventions incorporating childbirth preparation information (in which they were instructed in the methods and benefits of focused relaxation and imagery to increase the likelihood of a safe and relatively pain-free delivery.) The sessions provided an opportunity to experience and practice hypnotic induction and deep relaxation. The suggestions directed toward the expectant mothers during the hypnotic state focused on the conceptualization of pregnancy and childbirth as a healthy natural process. Suggestions were also given to help the patient respond to possible complications, in the event they might occur. These suggestions were designed to increase the patient’s sense of trust in her physician and her confidence in her own ability to manage anxiety and discomfort. Hypnotic inductions also included ego-strengthening techniques and suggestions for a relatively discomfort-free delivery and suggestions for the application of the hypnotic techniques to other stressful periods in their lives. In each session the patients were given the opportunity to ask any questions of concern regarding the method or the pregnancy.


Study 7: Hypnosis to Help Achieve Uncomplicated Birth
Hypnosis to Facilitate Uncomplicated Birth
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00029157.2004.10403614#preview

Results: Women receiving prenatal hypnosis had significantly better outcomes than women who did not. Further assessment suggested that hypnosis worked by preventing negative emotional factors from leading to a complicated birth outcome. Attention only was associated with minimal differences in outcome over the no-contact group. Concludes that the routine prenatal use of hypnosis could improve obstetric outcome.

Notes: The purpose of this study was to determine if prenatal hypnosis could facilitate uncomplicated birth. Following a psychosocial assessment, 520 pregnant women in their first or second trimester of pregnancy were randomized to receiving prenatal hypnosis or attention-only groups. The goal of the hypnosis was to reduce fear of birth and parenthood; to reduce anxiety; to reduce stress; to identify specific fears that might complicate the labor process (addressing them whenever possible); and to prepare women for the experience of labor. The attention-only group was matched to a no-contact comparison group.

American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, Volume 46, Issue 4, 2004, pages 299-312
By: Lewis E. Mehl-Madrona MD, PhDa, University of Arizona College of Medicine


Study 8: Self-Hypnosis for Pain Relief During Labor
The Effect of Hypnosis on Pain Relief During Labor and Childbirth in Iranian Pregnant Women

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00207140802665435#preview

Results: Women described their feelings about hypnosis during labor as: a sense of relief and consolation, self-confidence, satisfaction, lack of suffering labor pain, changing the feeling of pain into one of pressure, a decrease in fear of natural childbirth, lack of tiredness, and lack of anxiety. They expressed increased concentration on the uterus and cervical muscle, awareness of all the stages of labor, and having “positive thoughts.” Births were perceived as being very satisfactory compared to their previous experiences.

Notes: This study describes the effect of hypnosis on pain relief during labor and childbirth. Using a qualitative approach, 6 pregnant women were trained to use self-hypnosis for labor. Outcomes were analyzed using Colaizzi’s procedure.

International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Volume 57, Issue 2, 2009 pages 174-183
By: Marzieh Abbasia, Fery Ghazia, Ann Barlow-Harrison, Middelsex University, Lond, United Kingdom
Mehrdad Sheikhvatanb, Medical Sciences/Univeristy of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Fatemeh Mohammadyaric, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

I hope you found this article interesting and useful and please feel free to share.

Simon Maryan

 

Hypnosis and Pain


As a sufferer of chronic pain from various injuries over the years, the main being my left shoulder which is severely arthritic and having had 7 surgeries so far with the 8th planned for a few weeks time to fuse the joint. I am therefore acutely aware of how pain can interfere with everyday functioning both physically and mentally. I have been undertaking a meta analysis of research papers and projects for quite some time now and came across a number of studies which have shown that hypnosis can reduce the pain experienced during a variety of medical conditions including burn-wound debridement, [1] bone marrow aspirations, and childbirth.[2][3] The International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis found that hypnosis relieved the pain of 75% of 933 subjects participating in 27 different experiments.[4]

Hypnosis is effective in reducing pain from[5] and coping with cancer [6] and other chronic conditions.[7]Nausea and other symptoms related to incurable diseases may also be managed with hypnosis.[8][9][10][11] Some practitioners have claimed hypnosis might help boost the immune system of people with cancer. However, according to the American Cancer Society, “available scientific evidence does not support the idea that hypnosis can influence the development or progression of cancer.”[12]

Hypnosis has been used as a pain relieving technique during dental surgery and related pain management regimens as well. Researchers like Jerjes and his team have reported that hypnosis can help even those patients who have acute to severe orodental pain.[13] Additionally, Meyerson and Uziel have suggested that hypnotic methods have been found to be highly fruitful for alleviating anxiety in patients suffering from severe dental phobia.[14]

For some psychologists who uphold the altered state theory of hypnosis, pain relief in response to hypnosis is said to be the result of the brain’s dual-processing functionality. This effect is obtained either through the process of selective attention or dissociation, in which both theories involve the presence of activity in pain receptive regions of the brain, and a difference in the processing of the stimuli by the hypnotised subject.[15]

The American Psychological Association published a study comparing the effects of hypnosis, ordinary suggestion and placebo in reducing pain. The study found that highly suggestible individuals experienced a greater reduction in pain from hypnosis compared with placebo, whereas less suggestible subjects experienced no pain reduction from hypnosis when compared with placebo. Ordinary non-hypnotic suggestion also caused reduction in pain compared to placebo, but was able to reduce pain in a wider range of subjects (both high and low suggestible) than hypnosis. The results showed that it is primarily the subject’s responsiveness to suggestion, whether within the context of hypnosis or not, that is the main determinant of causing reduction in pain.[16]

Study 1: Hypnosis and Pain – Review of Clinical Trials
Hypnotic Treatment of Chronic Pain
http://www.mirtharust.com/articles/Chronic_Pain.pdf

Notes: This paper reviewed various controlled trials involving the use of hypnosis to control pain. It concluded that hypnosis can provide a significantly greater reduction in pain than physical therapy, education, or the management of medications. It even found that the hypnotic treatment did not even have to be called ‘hypnosis’ for it to be effective.

J Behav Med. 2006 Jan 11;1-30 By: M. Jensen, D. R. Patterson
Author Affiliations: Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington. University of Washington Multidisciplinary Pain Centre, Box 356044, University of Washington Medical Centre, 1959 N.E. Pacific, Seattle, Washington, 98195-6044

Study 2: Hypnosis and Pain – Another Review of Studies
Pain Management: Hypnosis and Its Place in Modern Pain Management – Review Article.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17767210

Notes: This paper reviewed the various scientific studies that showed hypnosis was an effective treatment for pain management. It concluded that in spite of some of the “methodological flaws” involved in many of the studies, there was “sufficient clinical evidence of sufficient quality” to conclude that hypnosis is an effective treatment for chronic pain.
Niger Postgrad Med J. 2007 Sept;14(3):238-41 By: F. E. Amadasun, Department of Anaesthesiology, University of Benin Teaching Hospital, Benin City, Nigeria

Study 3: Hypnosis and Pain – Yet Another Review of Studies
A Meta-Analysis of Hypnotically Induced Analgesia: How Effective is Hypnosis?
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00207140008410045#preview

This paper reviewed 18 studies conducted on the use of hypnosis to relieve pain over a two-decade period. It concluded that hypnosis provided an effective way to help people deal with pain because it had a “moderate to large hypnoanalgesic effect.” It further concluded that hypnosis should be more widely used in the treatment of pain.
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, Volume 48, Issue 2, 2000, pages 138-153 By: Guy H. Montgomerya, Katherine N. Duhamela, William H. Redda, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York

Study 4: Hypnosis – Alternative to Sedation for Surgery
Hypnosedation: A Valuable Alternative to Tradition Anaesthetic Techniques.Techniques.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10499382

Notes: This paper reports on the anecdotal use of hypnosis in over 1650 surgeries that were performed in the Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, at the University of Liège in Belgium. It confirmed that hypnosedation combined with local anaesthesia can be used as an alternative to more traditional means of sedation.
Acta Chir Belg. 1999; 99:141-146
M. E. Faymonville, M. Meurisse, J. Fissette, Dept. of Anaesthesia & Intensive Care, Univ. of Liega, Beligum

Study 5: Hypnosis for Pain During Plastic Surgery
Psychological Approaches During Conscious Sedation. Hypnosis Versus Stress Reducing Strategies: A Prospective Randomised Study.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9469526

Results: Not only did the group using hypnosis require significantly lower levels of midazolam and alfentanil than the control group; they reported experiencing significantly lower levels pain and anxiety; and a greater feeling of being in control during the entire process. Their vital signs were also found to be significantly more stable than those of the control group. This study suggests that hypnosis provides better perioperative pain and anxiety relief, allows for significant reductions in alfentanil and midazolam requirements, and improves patient satisfaction and surgical conditions as compared with conventional stress reducing strategies support in patients receiving conscious sedation for plastic surgery.

Notes: Sixty patients patients who were going to have plastic surgery using local anaesthetic and intravenous sedation (they could request midazolam and alfentanil if needed) were randomly placed into a control group where they were taught strategies for reducing stress, or into a group where they would receive hypnosis during the surgery. Their behaviour was monitored by a psychologist before, during, and after surgery where their levels of anxiety and pain, and feelings of being in control, were recorded.
Pain 1997, Dec;73(3)361-7
By: M. E. Faymonvillea, P. H. Mambourg, J. Jorisa, B. Vrijensc, J. Fissetted, A. Alberte, M. Lamyf

Study 6: Hypnosis for Pain – Angioplasty Procedure
Use of Hypnosis Before and During Angioplasty.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1951141

Results: This study found that the surgeons involved were able to keep the balloon inflated 25% longer with the hypnotised group. Forty-four percent of the control group also asked for more pain medication, compared with only 13% of the hypnotised group.

Notes: Thirty-two subjects were recruited for this study. Sixteen were randomly assigned to be in the control group and 16 were hypnotised before they underwent an angioplasty (a procedure where a balloon is inserted into a vein and then inflated to help open the vein while the patient remains conscious and aware).
Am J Clin Hypn. 1991 Jul;34(1):29-37
By: E. J. Weinstein, P. K. Au, Kaiser Permanente Center for Health Research, USA

Study 7: Reason Why Hypnosis Alleviates Pain (not Because of release of Endorphins)
Naloxone Fails to Reverse Hypnotic Alleviation of Chronic Pain
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6415744

Notes: Some researchers had previously believed that the reason hypnosis helps to reduce chronic pain was that it caused the body to produce endorphins (our natural pain killers). To test this theory, 6 patients suffering from chronic pain (caused by peripheral nerve irritation) were taught self-hypnosis to reduce their feelings of pain. They were then randomly given either a saline solution (a placebo) or naloxone (a drug that is known to block the effects of endorphins) and were tested for pain at 5 minute intervals for an hour. If the analgesic effect of hypnosis was somehow caused by the internal production of endorphins, then naloxone would have caused the pain to return. However, the results of this study demonstrated that naloxone had no effect on the power of hypnosis to reduce pain. As a result, it was determined that endorphins are not involved in hypnotic pain control.
Psychopharmacology (Berl). 1983;81(2):140-3
By: D. Spiegel, L. H. Albert, Dept. of Psych., Stanford Univ.

Study 8: Hypnosis for Pain – Fibromyalgia
Functional Anatomy of Hypnotic Analgesia: A PET Study of Patients with Fibromyalgia.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10700332

Results: The subjects all reported experiencing less pain when they were in the state of hypnosis, then they did when they were in a state of rest. The researchers also found that there were significant differences in the way the blood flowed through the brain in these two states. They found that during hypnotically-induced analgesia the blood flow “was bilaterally increased in the orbitofrontal and subcallosial cingulate cortices, the right thalamus, and the left inferior parietal cortex, and was decreased bilaterally in the cingulate cortex.” This study proved that hypnosis leads to real physical changes in the brain.

Notes: In an attempt to understand what happens in the brain when a person is hypnotised and then given suggestions for pain relief, subjects were recruited who were suffering from the painful condition of fibromyalgia. PET (positron emission tomography) scans were then taken of their brains when they were resting and then when they were in a state of hypnotically-induced analgesia.
European Journal of Pain. Vol. 3(1) 1999; 7-12
By: G. Wik, H. Fischer, B. Bragée, B. Finer, M. Fredrikson, Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Karolinska Institute and Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden

Study 9: Hypnosis for Burn Pains
Hypnosis for the treatment of burn pain.
http://europepmc.org/abstract/MED/1383302

Results: Only hypnotised subjects reported significant pain reductions relative to pretreatment baseline. This result was corroborated by nurse VAS ratings. Findings indicate that hypnosis is a viable adjunct treatment for burn pain.

Notes: The clinical utility of hypnosis for controlling pain during burn wound debridement was investigated. Thirty hospitalised burn patients and their nurses submitted visual analog scales (VAS) for pain during 2 consecutive daily wound debridements (the process of removing nonliving tissue from burns). On the 1st day, patients and nurses submitted baseline VAS ratings. Before the next day’s wound debridement, subjects received hypnosis, attention and information, or no treatment.
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology [1992, 60(5):713-717
By: D. R. Patterson, J. J. Everett, G. L. Burns, J. A. Marvin, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle 98195

Study 10: Self-Hypnosis for Pain and Anxiety During Biopsy Outpatient Procedures
Adjunctive self-hypnotic relaxation for outpatient medical procedures: A prospective randomised trial with women undergoing large core breast biopsy
http://www.painjournalonline.com/article/S0304-3959(06)00393-9/abstract

Results: Women’s anxiety increased significantly in the standard group (logit slope=0.18, p<0.001), did not change in the empathy group (slope=-0.04, p=0.45), and decreased significantly in the hypnosis group (slope=-0.27, p<0.001). Pain increased significantly in all three groups (logit slopes: standard care=0.53, empathy=0.37, hypnosis=0.34; all p<0.001) though less steeply with hypnosis and empathy than standard care (p=0.024 and p=0.018, respectively). Room time and cost were not significantly different in an univariate ANOVA despite hypnosis and empathy requiring an additional professional: 46min/$161 for standard care, 43min/$163 for empathy, and 39min/$152 for hypnosis. We conclude that, while both structured empathy and hypnosis decrease procedural pain and anxiety, hypnosis provides more powerful anxiety relief without undue cost and thus appears attractive for outpatient pain management.

Notes: Medical procedures in outpatient settings have limited options of managing pain and anxiety pharmacologically. We therefore assessed whether this can be achieved by adjunct self-hypnotic relaxation in a common and particularly anxiety provoking procedure. Two hundred and thirty-six women referred for large core needle breast biopsy to an urban tertiary university-affiliated medical centre were prospectively randomised to receive standard care (n=76), structured empathic attention (n=82), or self-hypnotic relaxation (n=78) during their procedures. Patients’ self-ratings at 10min-intervals of pain and anxiety on 0-10 verbal analog scales with 0=no pain/anxiety at all, 10=worst pain/anxiety possible, were compared in an ordinal logistic regression model.
PAIN, Volume 126, Issue 1, Pages 155-164, 15 December 2006
By: Elvira V. Lang, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Centre/Harvard Medical School, Department of Radiology
Kevin S. Berbaum, Salomao Faintuch, Olga Hatsiopoulou, Noami Halsey, Xinyu Li, Michael L. Berbaum, Eleanor Laser, Janet Baum

Study 11: Hypnosis for HIV Neuropathic Pain
Hypnosis for Treatment of HIV Neuropathic Pain: A Preliminary Report
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/pme.12074/abstract;jsessionid=FDE3EE6797A0D9728AC3692148843D74.d01t02

Results: Mean SFMPQ total pain scores were reduced from 17.8 to 13.2 (F[1, 35]?=?16.06, P?<?0.001). The reductions were stable throughout the 7-week post intervention period. At exit, 26 out of 36 (72%) had improved pain scores. Of the 26 who improved, mean pain reduction was 44%. Improvement was found irrespective of whether or not participants were taking pain medications. There was also evidence for positive changes in measures of affect and quality of life.

Notes: Painful HIV distal sensory polyneuropathy (HIV-DSP) is the most common nervous system disorder in HIV patients. The symptoms adversely affect patients’ quality of life and often diminish their capacity for independent self-care. No interventions have been shown to be consistently effective in treating the disorder. The purpose of the present study was to determine whether hypnosis could be a useful intervention in the management of painful HIV-DSP. Participants were 36 volunteers with HIV-DSP who received three weekly training sessions in self-hypnosis. Participants were followed for pain and its sequelae for 7 weeks prior to the intervention, and for 7 weeks post intervention. Participants remained on the same standard-of-care pain regimen for the entire 17 weeks of the protocol. The primary outcome measure was the Short Form McGill Pain Questionnaire scale (SFMPQ) total pain score. Other outcome measures assessed changes in affective state and quality of life.
Pain Medicine online version of journal published online April 8, 2013
By: David Dorfman PhD1,*, Mary Catherine George MM2, Julie Schnur PhD3, David M. Simpson MD2, George Davidson PhD2, Guy Montgomery PhD3
Author Information:

  1. Department of Psychiatry, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA
  2. Department of Neurology, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA
  3. Department of Oncological Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA

Additional References:

  1. Patterson, David R.; Questad, Kent A.; De Lateur, Barbara J. (1989). “Hypnotherapy as an adjunct to narcotic analgesia for the treatment of pain for burn debridement”. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis 31 (3): 156–163.
  2. Mendoza, M. E.; Capafons, A. (2009). “Efficacy of clinical hypnosis: A summary of its empirical evidence” (PDF). Papeles del Psicólogo 30 (2): 98–116.
  3. Ewin, D.M. (2001). “The use of hypnosis in the treatment of cancer patients” (PDF). International Handbook of Clinical Hypnosis: 274–283.
  4. Nash, Michael R. “The Truth and the Hype of Hypnosis”. Scientific American: July 2001
  5. Butler, B. (1954). “The use of hypnosis in the care of the cancer patient” (PDF). Cancer 7 (1): 1–14.
  6. Peynovska, R.; Fisher, J.; Oliver, D.; Matthew, V. M. (2003). “Efficacy of hypnotherapy as a supplement therapy in cancer intervention” (PDF). Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of The Royal College of Psychiatrists, 30 June – 3 July 2003.
  7. Nash, Michael R. “The Truth and the Hype of Hypnosis”. Scientific American: July 2001
  8. Spiegel, D.; Moore, R. (1997). “Imagery and hypnosis in the treatment of cancer patients”. Oncology 11 (8): 1179–1195.
  9. Garrow, D.; Egede, L. E. (2006). “National patterns and correlates of complementary and alternative medicine use in adults with diabetes”. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine 12 (9): 895–902.
  10. Mascot, C. (2004). “Hypnotherapy: A complementary therapy with broad applications”. Diabetes Self Management 21 (5): 15–18.
  11. Kwekkeboom, K.L.; Gretarsdottir, E. (2006). “Systematic review of relaxation interventions for pain”. Journal of Nursing Scholarship 38 (3): 269–277.
  12. “Hypnosis”. American Cancer Society. November 2008. Retrieved 22 September 2013.
  13. Jerjes; et al. (2007). “Psychological intervention in acute dental pain: Review”. British Dental Journal 202.
  14. Meyerson, J.; Uziel, N. “Application of hypno-dissociative strategies during dental treatment of patients with severe dental phobia”. The International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis 63.
  15. Myers, David G. (2014). Psychology: Tenth Edition in Modules (10th ed.). Worth Publishers. pp. 112–13.
  16. “Hypnosis, suggestion, and placebo in the reduction of experimental pain” faqs.org

Hypnosis and the Brain – Body Connection


I found this article on research at Stanford University School of Medicine that has identified three specific areas of the brain that are altered by hypnosis. It goes on to explain how effective hypnosis can be in using our minds to control our perception and our bodies and also, that there is a brain-body connection that helps the brain process and control what’s going on in the body.

So many benefits to using hypnosis to your advantage.

http://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2016/07/study-identifies-brain-areas-altered-during-hypnotic-trances.html

Key to Your Mind.001