Basic HTML Version
338
SYLVAIN NÉRON AND RANDOLPH STEPHENSON
R
EVIEW OF
P
UBLISHED
S
TUDIES
Hypnotic Analgesia in Clinical Pain
In 1996, the report of the NIH Technology Assessment Panel con-
cluded that there is strong evidence for the use of hypnosis in the treat-
ment of pain including chronic cancer pain (Anonymous, 1996).
Montgomery, DuHamel, and Redd (2000), following a meta-analysis of
controlled trials, concluded that hypnosis can provide substantial pain
reduction for 75% of the studied population. Patterson and Jensen
(2003) in a review of controlled trials for clinical pain concluded that
hypnotic analgesia is superior to attention or standard-care control
conditions. From these findings, it can be concluded that clinical hyp-
nosis is as an empirically validated treatment (Lynn, Kirsch, & Koby,
2006). Moreover, the critical reviews published by Genuis (1995) and
Sellick and Zaza (1998) suggest that there is much support for using
nonpharmacologic strategies in cancer management.
Effectiveness of Hypnosis in Managing Acute Cancer Pain and Anxiety
In their cancer-treatment trajectory, patients find themselves
exposed to several clinical situations and procedures in which they
may experience distress and pain. According to Deng and Cassileth
(2005), hypnosis is a mind-body technique that may be offered to alter
the perception of pain. Hypnosis has been demonstrated an effective
treatment for acute clinical and procedural pain (see Table 1) in non-
cancer treatment (Faymonville et al., 1997; Lang et al., 2000; Lang,
Joyce, Spiegel, Hamilton, & Lee, 1996; Montgomery, David, Winkel,
Silverstein, & Bovbjerg, 2002; Patterson, Everett, Burns, & Marvin,
1992; Patterson, Questad, & Boltwood, 1987).
Hypnosis has been studied as an adjunct to pharmacological analge-
sia in cancer patients (Classen et al., 2001; Goudas et al., 2001; Hilgard &
LeBaron, 1982; D. Spiegel & Bloom, 1983; Trijsburg, van Knippenberg, &
Rijpma, 1992). Hypnosis has also been utilized successfully, as exem-
plified in case reports of preparation for surgery, as an adjunct to
cancer treatment (Lynch, 1999).
Most controlled studies have focused on surgery, bone marrow aspi-
rations, and burn-wound-care pain. Syrjala, Cummings, and Donaldson
(1992) tested hypnosis for reduction of pain and postchemotherapy nau-
sea and emesis in 67 bone-marrow-transplant patients. Patients were
randomized to hypnosis, coping-skills training, therapist-contact con-
trol, or treatment as usual. Hypnosis interventions were adapted indi-
vidually and each patient in the hypnosis group was provided with an
audiotape to which they had to listen for a period of 20 consecutive
days. Hypnosis was more significantly effective than the other interven-
tions in reducing oral pain. However, no significant differences were
found in nausea, emesis, or medication reduction.
Downloaded by [ ] at 02:21 27 March 2012