Basic HTML Version
A Controlled Study of a Hypnotic Method in the Treatment of Alcoholism
27
the time from the first contact with the alcohol clinic to the first treatment
(median H = 227
days, N = 192 days).
The groups were also compared as to (e)
numher of admissions to
and (f)
days of care
in the alcohol clinic,
(g)
convictions for drunkenness
and (h)
drunk driving. In
none of the
variables (a)-(h) did the distributions show differences between the groups significant
at the 5% level.
Method
The patients in group N were treated in the way common at this clinic: psycho-
therapy (of supporting character and aimed partly at the acute problems of the
patient, partly at motivating him for more lasting actions against the misuse of
alcohol); if needed Antabuse and psychopharmaca; contact with a psychologist or
social worker; remittance to other clinics; referral to the Alcoholics Anonymous.
All treatments were given to out-patients. The period of treatment was regarded to
be finished after 5 scheduled visits to one of the physicians taking part in the experi-
ment.
The patients in group H had mostly the same treatment but instead of psycho-
therapy they had a standardized hypnotic treatment during 5 seances. No unsober
patients were treated with hypnosis.
The hypnosis was started with a relaxation exercise according to Pierce (le Cron
1964), followed by suggestions of deeper relaxation and hypnosis induction mainly
according to Wolberg (1948, p. 115). The only test of the depth of the hypnosis
used was hand levitation or catalepsy in one arm. Carefully defined therapeutic
suggestions were given almost verbatim from time to time. They were aimed at
indifference towards alcohol, well-being caused by sobriety and a wish to find help
at the clinic rather than taking the first glass. The first seance lasted 20-30 minutes,
the following usually 15-20 minutes. The intention of the standardized technique
was not to make the patient dependent on any one physician.
The patients were encouraged to do the relaxation exercises at home and were
given oral and written instructions. AU of them were offered to have a complete
tape recording of a seance or in case of need to listen to a recorder at the clinic.
None of the patients in group H had further treatment with hypnosis during the
observation period but they and group N were subject to the treatment common at
the clinic.
The treatments commenced in January 1970 and we hoped then to finish them
within five months. For several reasons it was, however, rather difficult to get
patients quickly to the investigation and often the patients did not turn up but had
to be called. This caused the last treatments to be given as late as in April 1971.
Follow-Up
During the observation period, 6 months after the last treatment, all the patients
were welcome to visit F.S. or N.J. At the end of this time the patients were summoned
to an interview. After the end of the observation period registered data about the
patients were requested fi-om hospitals and from the civil authorities. The relatives
were not questioned since many of the patients lacked family. For reasons of secrecy
employers were not questioned.