Abrahamsen Randi, Baad-Hansen Lene, Svensson Peter
Department of Clinical Oral Physiology, School of Dentistry, University of Aarhus, Vennelyst Boulevard 9, DK-8000 Aarhus, Denmark.
Pain. 2008 May;136(1-2):44-52. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2007.06.013. Epub 2007 Aug 6.
This controlled and patient blinded study tested the effect of hypnosis on persistent idiopathic orofacial pain (PIOP) in terms of clinical and psychosocial findings. Forty-one PIOP were randomized to active hypnotic intervention or simple relaxation as control for five individual 1-h sessions. Primary outcome was average pain intensity scored three times daily in a pain diary using visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcome measures were pain quality assessed by McGill pain questionnaire (MPQ), psychological symptoms assessed by symptom check list (SCL), quality of life assessed by SF36, sleep quality, and consumption of analgesic. Data were compared between groups before and after treatment using ANOVA models and paired t-tests. The change in VAS pain scores from baseline to the last treatment (t4) was (33.1+/-7.4%) in the hypnosis group and (3.2+/-5.4%) in the control group (P<0.03). In the hypnosis group, highly hypnotic susceptible patients had greater decreases in VAS pain scores (55.0+/-12.3%) when compared to less susceptible patients (17.9+/-6.7%) (P<0.02). After the last treatment there were also statistically significant differences between groups in perceived pain area (MPQ) and the use of weak analgesics (P<0.03). There were no statistically significant changes in SCL or SF36 scores from baseline to t4. In conclusion, hypnosis seems to offer clinically relevant pain relief in PIOP, particularly in highly susceptible patients. However, stress coping skills and unresolved psychological problems need to be included in a comprehensive management plan in order also to address psychological symptoms and quality of life.
这项对照且患者盲法研究,从临床和社会心理结果方面测试了催眠对持续性特发性口面部疼痛(PIOP)的影响。41名PIOP患者被随机分为接受积极催眠干预组或单纯放松对照组,进行5次每次1小时的个体治疗。主要结局是使用视觉模拟量表(VAS),在疼痛日记中每天三次记录的平均疼痛强度评分。次要结局指标包括通过麦吉尔疼痛问卷(MPQ)评估的疼痛性质、通过症状清单(SCL)评估的心理症状、通过SF36评估的生活质量、睡眠质量以及镇痛药的消耗量。使用方差分析模型和配对t检验对治疗前后两组的数据进行比较。从基线到最后一次治疗(t4),催眠组的VAS疼痛评分变化为(33.1±7.4%),对照组为(3.2±5.4%)(P<0.03)。在催眠组中,高度易被催眠的患者与不易被催眠的患者相比,VAS疼痛评分下降幅度更大(55.0±12.3%比17.9±6.7%)(P<0.02)。最后一次治疗后,两组在疼痛感知区域(MPQ)和弱镇痛药使用方面也存在统计学显著差异(P<0.03)。从基线到t4,SCL或SF36评分没有统计学显著变化。总之,催眠似乎能为PIOP提供具有临床意义的疼痛缓解,尤其是在高度易被催眠的患者中。然而,压力应对技能和未解决的心理问题需要纳入综合管理计划,以解决心理症状和生活质量问题。