THE POSSIBLE ROLE OF HYPNOSIS IN HOMOGRAFT RETENTION: A PRELIMINARY REPORT. (25/143)

Hypnosis was used to alter body image in an attempt to enable a woman to retain a skin homograft from an unrelated male donor. The man also acted as a nonhypnotized control by receiving a homograft from the hypnotized woman. Oneinch square full-thickness skin homografts were exchanged between the upper arms of the two volunteers. The homograft on the arm of the woman is still viable after eight months; the homograft on the man was rejected within two weeks. A second experiment in which the same subject was told under hypnosis to reject the homograft failed to produce rejection.Definite conclusions are not yet justified. Among factors to be considered in the present case are an unusual compatibility, schizophrenia as an inhibitor of the rejection mechanism, hypnotically induced irreversible acceptance, or other unknown mechanisms.  (+info)

Long term benefits of hypnotherapy for irritable bowel syndrome. (26/143)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is now good evidence from several sources that hypnotherapy can relieve the symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome in the short term. However, there is no long term data on its benefits and this information is essential before the technique can be widely recommended. This study aimed to answer this question. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 204 patients prospectively completed questionnaires scoring symptoms, quality of life, anxiety, and depression before, immediately after, and up to six years following hypnotherapy. All subjects also subjectively assessed the effects of hypnotherapy retrospectively in order to define their "responder status". RESULTS: 71% of patients initially responded to therapy. Of these, 81% maintained their improvement over time while the majority of the remaining 19% claimed that deterioration of symptoms had only been slight. With respect to symptom scores, all items at follow up were significantly improved on pre-hypnotherapy levels (p<0.001) and showed little change from post-hypnotherapy values. There were no significant differences in the symptom scores between patients assessed at 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5+ years following treatment. Quality of life and anxiety or depression scores were similarly still significantly improved at follow up (p<0.001) but did show some deterioration. Patients also reported a reduction in consultation rates and medication use following the completion of hypnotherapy. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that the beneficial effects of hypnotherapy appear to last at least five years. Thus it is a viable therapeutic option for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome.  (+info)

Use of aromatherapy (with or without hypnosis) in the treatment of intractable epilepsy--a two-year follow-up study. (27/143)

We have been trying the effect of aromatherapy (with or without hypnosis) in patients with intractable epilepsy who ask for it. This is a report of the first 100 patients to try the treatment, followed up for at least two years after the treatment ended. It is important to remember that this was a treatment for people who had asked for it and for whom time and a therapist was available. It was not a controlled trial but was carried out when we could and at a time when we were experimenting with the best way of using it. Results must therefore be treated with caution and with due regard to other therapeutic factors that may be implicated in the results, both good and bad. We assume that the result (with over a third of the patients using aromatherapy with or without hypnosis becoming seizure free for at least a year) as being the best that could be achieved and likely to be less in a properly controlled trial. Of the three treatments tried (aromatherapy on its own, aromatherapy plus hypnosis and hypnosis without aromatherapy), aromatherapy plus hypnosis seems to have had the best and most lasting effect (a third of patients still seizure free at two years), but was the most labour intensive and needed medical therapist input. Aromatherapy itself might be best reserved as a short-term treatment for people going through a bad time with their seizures. A fuller and more lasting effect may be obtained with aromatherapy plus hypnosis, but this needs a patient who is prepared to put much time and personal effort into the treatment.  (+info)

A critical review of techniques aiming at enhancing and sustaining worker's alertness during the night shift. (28/143)

Two types of methods based on a particular principle allow enhancing and sustaining workers' alertness all along their night work. The first one rather consists in arousing workers by exposing them to stimulant environment conditions (light or noise...) or by giving them natural or pharmacological reactivating substances (caffeine or amphetamines...) for example. The second principle consists in increasing workers' possibilities for resting and allowing them to have short sleep periods or Short Rest Periods (SRP) in an adapted area at the workplace. In order to use these techniques in real work situations, after a critical review taking into account both efficiency, advantages and disadvantages but also applicability and acceptability, the SRP technique stands out as the most efficient method as it has a certain number of advantages with regard to our initial objective.  (+info)

Pharmacodynamic interaction between propofol and remifentanil regarding hypnosis, tolerance of laryngoscopy, bispectral index, and electroencephalographic approximate entropy. (29/143)

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this investigation was to describe the pharmacodynamic interaction between propofol and remifentanil for probability of no response to shaking and shouting, probability of no response to laryngoscopy, Bispectral Index (BIS), and electroencephalographic approximate entropy (AE). METHODS: Twenty healthy volunteers received either propofol or remifentanil alone and then concurrently with a fixed concentration of remifentanil or propofol, respectively, via a target-controlled infusion. Responses to shaking and shouting and to laryngoscopy were assessed multiple times after allowing for plasma effect site equilibration. The raw electroencephalogram and BIS were recorded throughout the study, and AE was calculated off-line. Response surfaces were fit to the clinical response data using logistic regression or hierarchical response models. Response surfaces were also estimated for BIS and AE. Surfaces were visualized using three-dimensional rotations. Model parameters were estimated with NONMEM. RESULTS: Remifentanil alone had no appreciable effect on response to shaking and shouting or response to laryngoscopy. Propofol could ablate both responses. Modest remifentanil concentrations dramatically reduced the concentrations of propofol required to ablate both responses. The hierarchical response surface described the data better than empirical logistic regression. BIS and AE are more sensitive to propofol than to remifentanil. CONCLUSIONS: Remifentanil alone is ineffective at ablating response to stimuli but demonstrates potent synergy with propofol. BIS and AE values corresponding to 95% probability of ablating response are influenced by the combination of propofol and remifentanil to achieve this endpoint, with higher propofol concentrations producing lower values for BIS and AE.  (+info)

Increased anterior corpus callosum size associated positively with hypnotizability and the ability to control pain. (30/143)

This is the first MRI study to report differences in brain structure size between low and highly hypnotizable, healthy, right-handed young adults. Participants were stringently screened for hypnotic susceptibility with two standardized scales, and then exposed to hypnotic analgesia training to control cold pressor pain. Only the highly hypnotizable subjects (HHs) who eliminated pain perception were included in the present study. These HHs, who demonstrated more effective attentional and inhibitory capabilities, had a significantly (P < 0.003) larger (31.8%) rostrum, a corpus callosum area involved in the allocation of attention and transfer of information between prefrontal cortices, than low hypnotizable subjects (LHs). These results provide support to the neuropsychophysiological model that HHs have more effective frontal attentional systems implementing control, monitoring performance and inhibiting unwanted stimuli from conscious awareness, than LHs.  (+info)

Hypnosis for pain relief in labour and childbirth: a systematic review. (31/143)

BACKGROUND: In view of widespread claims of efficacy, we examined the evidence regarding the effects of hypnosis for pain relief during childbirth. METHODS: Medline, Embase, Pubmed, and the Cochrane library 2004.1 were searched for clinical trials where hypnosis during pregnancy and childbirth was compared with a non-hypnosis intervention, no treatment or placebo. Reference lists from retrieved papers and hypnotherapy texts were also examined. There were no language restrictions. Our primary outcome measures were labour analgesia requirements (no analgesia, opiate, or epidural use), and pain scores in labour. Suitable comparative studies were included for further assessment according to predefined criteria. Meta-analyses were performed of the included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), assessed as being of "good" or "adequate" quality by a predefined score. RESULTS: Five RCTs and 14 non-randomized comparisons (NRCs) studying 8395 women were identified where hypnosis was used for labour analgesia. Four RCTs including 224 patients examined the primary outcomes of interest. One RCT rated poor on quality assessment. Meta-analyses of the three remaining RCTs showed that, compared with controls, fewer parturients having hypnosis required analgesia, relative risk=0.51 (95% confidence interval 0.28, 0.95). Of the two included NRCs, one showed that women using hypnosis rated their labour pain less severe than controls (P<0.01). The other showed that hypnosis reduced opioid (meperidine) requirements (P<0.001), and increased the incidence of not requiring pharmacological analgesia in labour (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The risk/benefit profile of hypnosis demonstrates a need for well-designed trials to confirm the effects of hypnosis in childbirth.  (+info)

General practitioners believe that hypnotherapy could be a useful treatment for irritable bowel syndrome in primary care. (32/143)

BACKGROUND: Irritable bowel syndrome is a common condition in general practice. It occurs in 10 to 20% of the population, but less than half seek medical assistance with the complaint. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to the 406 GPs listed on the West Sussex Health Authority Medical List to investigate their views of this condition and whether they felt hypnotherapy had a place in its management RESULTS: 38% of general practitioners responded. The achieved sample shared the characteristics of target sample. Nearly half thought that irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) was a "nervous complaint" and used a combination of "the placebo effect of personal care," therapeutic, and dietary advice. There is considerable divergence in the perceived effectiveness of current approaches. Over 70% thought that hypnotherapy may have a role in the management of patients with IBS; though the majority (68%) felt that this should not be offered by general practitioners. 84% felt that this should be offered by qualified hypnotherapist, with 40% feeling that this should be offered outside the health service. CONCLUSIONS: General practitioners vary in their perceptions of what constitutes effective therapy in IBS. They are willing to consider referral to a qualified hypnotherapist.  (+info)