International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis最新文献

Until now, there has been an acute shortage of valid and reliable tools in Russia for making an accurate and highly differentiable assessment of hypnotizability. However, numerous studies confirm the high efficiency, reliability, and accuracy of the Elkins Hypnotizability Scale (EHS), allowing it to claim the title of the new gold standard for assessing hypnotizability. In the present study, the original English-language version of the EHS was translated into Russian. One hundred and five volunteers from Moscow (42% male; 58% female), aged 19 to 44, underwent a hypnotizability assessment procedure according to the EHS protocol. The Russian version of the EHS, like the original, requires an average of 28 minutes to administer and score by a trained assessor. The results showed that the Russian version of the EHS has good internal consistency and does not contain unnecessary elements. Alpha Cronbach values (0.76), and the item-total correlations (r_s = 0.44-0.64) are satisfactory.

When individuals score high on hypnotizability, they usually report experiencing an altered state of consciousness, physiological changes, and attentional shifts during hypnotic induction procedures as well. We hypothesize that a better interoception of such internal changes is also relevant for accurate sleep perception. We compared subjects scoring high versus low on hypnotizability to the accuracy of their estimations of Sleep Onset Latency (SOL) time awake, and sleep depth and explored their objective sleep. We sampled seven studies performed in our sleep labs across a midday nap or a night resulting in n = 231 subjects (aged 30.11 (SD = 17.02) years, range 18-82 with 15.2% males). Hypnotizability did not influence the accuracy of the perception of time needed to fall asleep or time spent awake. However, the reported sleep depth correlated significantly with the measured amount of slow-wave sleep in high hypnotizables. This pattern appeared across a nap as well as a whole night's sleep studies. We did not find any significant differences in objective sleep patterns depending on hypnotizability. Probably, high hypnotizables benefit from a better interoceptive ability for their perception of their sleep depth.

Although strong evidence exists for using individual hypnosis to treat pain, evidence regarding group applications is limited. This project evaluated changes in multiple outcome measures in persons with chronic pain treated with 8 weeks of group hypnosis. Eighty-five adults with diverse chronic pain etiologies completed an 8-session, structured group hypnosis treatment. Pain intensity, pain interference, and global health were evaluated at baseline, posttreatment, and 3- and 6-months posttreatment. Linear mixed effects models assessed changes in outcomes over time. In a model testing, all three outcome measures simultaneously, participants improved substantially from pre- to posttreatment and maintained improvement across follow-up. Analyses of individual outcomes showed significant pre- to posttreatment reductions in pain intensity and interference, which were maintained for pain intensity and continued to improve for pain interference across follow-up. The findings provide compelling preliminary evidence that a group format is an effective delivery system for teaching individual skills in using hypnosis for chronic pain management. Larger randomized controlled trials are warranted to demonstrate equivalence of outcomes between treatment modes.

Hypnosis interventions have too often failed to disseminate, in part because of the relatively few high-quality, randomized clinical trials. The Task Force proposes efficacy guidelines, which are intended to improve the quality of clinical hypnosis research and thereby increase dissemination of beneficial hypnosis interventions. However, the Task Force, in muddying the focus on efficacy with opinions about moderation and mediation, proposes guidelines that are likely to: (1) weaken efficacy findings; (2) increase participant mistrust; (3) make efficacy trials more cumbersome; and, (4) treat hypnosis as though it were something other than a time-honored form of talk therapy. While applauding the Task Force's intentions, the current recommendations could be changed to better accomplish their goal of increasing hypnosis dissemination and implementation.

This randomized, controlled trial tested the impact that hypnosis delivered through immersive virtual reality technology on background pain, anxiety, opioid use, and hospital length of stay in a sample of patients hospitalized for trauma. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either virtual-reality-induced hypnosis, virtual reality for distraction, or usual care during the course of their hospitalization. Mean number of treatment sessions was 3. A total of 153 patients participated in the study. Results indicated no significant differences between the experimental and control conditions on any outcome measures. This study used an early version of virtual reality technology to induce hypnosis and highlighted several important lessons about the challenges of implementation of this technology and how to improve its use in clinical settings.