Stoelb Brenda L, Molton Ivan R, Jensen Mark P, Patterson David R
University of Washington School of Medicine, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, Seattle, WA, USA.
Contemp Hypn. 2009 Mar 1;26(1):24-39. doi: 10.1002/ch.370.
This article both summarizes the previous reviews of randomized, controlled trials of hypnotic analgesia for the treatment of chronic and acute pain in adults, and reviews similar trials which have recently been published in the scientific literature. The results indicate that for both chronic and acute pain conditions: (1) hypnotic analgesia consistently results in greater decreases in a variety of pain outcomes compared to no treatment/standard care; (2) hypnosis frequently out-performs non-hypnotic interventions (e.g. education, supportive therapy) in terms of reductions in pain-related outcomes; and (3) hypnosis performs similarly to treatments that contain hypnotic elements (such as progressive muscle relaxation), but is not surpassed in efficacy by these alternative treatments. Factors that may influence the efficacy of hypnotic analgesia interventions are discussed, including, but not limited to, the patient's level of suggestibility, treatment outcome expectancy, and provider expertise. Based upon this body of literature, suggestions are offered for practitioners who are using, or would like to use, hypnosis for the amelioration of pain problems in their patients or clients.
本文既总结了先前针对催眠镇痛治疗成人慢性和急性疼痛的随机对照试验的综述，也回顾了最近发表在科学文献中的类似试验。结果表明，对于慢性和急性疼痛状况：（1）与未治疗/标准护理相比，催眠镇痛始终能使各种疼痛指标有更大程度的降低；（2）在减轻疼痛相关指标方面，催眠常常优于非催眠干预措施（如教育、支持性治疗）；（3）催眠的效果与包含催眠元素的治疗方法（如渐进性肌肉松弛）相似，但这些替代治疗方法在疗效上并未超过催眠。文中讨论了可能影响催眠镇痛干预效果的因素，包括但不限于患者的易受暗示程度、治疗结果预期和提供者的专业知识。基于这一系列文献，为正在使用或希望使用催眠来改善患者疼痛问题的从业者提供了建议。
