Lang Elvira V, Berbaum Kevin S, Pauker Stephen G, Faintuch Salomao, Salazar Gloria M, Lutgendorf Susan, Laser Eleanor, Logan Henrietta, Spiegel David
Department of Radiology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center/Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02215, USA.
J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2008 Jun;19(6):897-905. doi: 10.1016/j.jvir.2008.01.027. Epub 2008 Mar 17.
To determine how hypnosis and empathic attention during percutaneous tumor treatments affect pain, anxiety, drug use, and adverse events.
For their tumor embolization or radiofrequency ablation, 201 patients were randomized to receive standard care, empathic attention with defined behaviors displayed by an additional provider, or self-hypnotic relaxation including the defined empathic attention behaviors. All had local anesthesia and access to intravenous medication. Main outcome measures were pain and anxiety assessed every 15 minutes by patient self-report, medication use (with 50 mug fentanyl or 1 mg midazolam counted as one unit), and adverse events, defined as occurrences requiring extra medical attention, including systolic blood pressure fluctuations (> or =50 mm Hg change to >180 mm Hg or <105 mm Hg), vasovagal episodes, cardiac events, and respiratory impairment.
Patients treated with hypnosis experienced significantly less pain and anxiety than those in the standard care and empathy groups at several time intervals and received significantly fewer median drug units (mean, 2.0; interquartile range [IQR], 1-4) than patients in the standard (mean, 3.0; IQR, 1.5-5.0; P = .0147) and empathy groups (mean, 3.50; IQR, 2.0-5.9; P = .0026). Thirty-one of 65 patients (48%) in the empathy group had adverse events, which was significantly more than in the hypnosis group (eight of 66; 12%; P = .0001) and standard care group (18 of 70; 26%; P = .0118).
Procedural hypnosis including empathic attention reduces pain, anxiety, and medication use. Conversely, empathic approaches without hypnosis that provide an external focus of attention and do not enhance patients' self-coping can result in more adverse events. These findings should have major implications in the education of procedural personnel.
确定经皮肿瘤治疗过程中的催眠和共情关注如何影响疼痛、焦虑、药物使用及不良事件。
201例接受肿瘤栓塞或射频消融治疗的患者被随机分为三组,分别接受标准护理、由额外医护人员表现出特定行为的共情关注,或包含特定共情关注行为的自我催眠放松。所有患者均接受局部麻醉并可使用静脉药物。主要观察指标包括:患者每15分钟自我报告的疼痛和焦虑情况、药物使用情况(50微克芬太尼或1毫克咪达唑仑计为一个单位),以及不良事件,不良事件定义为需要额外医疗关注的情况,包括收缩压波动(变化≥50毫米汞柱至>180毫米汞柱或<105毫米汞柱)、血管迷走神经发作、心脏事件及呼吸功能损害。
在多个时间点,接受催眠治疗的患者所经历的疼痛和焦虑明显少于接受标准护理和共情关注组的患者,且其接受的药物单位中位数(均值为2.0;四分位间距[IQR]为1 - 4)明显少于标准护理组(均值为3.0;IQR为1.5 - 5.0;P = 0.0147)和共情关注组(均值为3.50;IQR为2.0 - 5.9;P = 0.0026)。共情关注组65例患者中有31例(48%)出现不良事件,明显多于催眠组(66例中的8例;12%;P = 0.0001)和标准护理组(70例中的18例;26%;P = 0.0118)。
包括共情关注的程序性催眠可减轻疼痛、焦虑并减少药物使用。相反,未采用催眠的共情方法虽能提供外部注意力焦点但未增强患者自我应对能力,可能导致更多不良事件。这些发现对程序性医护人员的培训具有重要意义。