Department of Prosthodontics,Friedrich-Alexander University, Erlangen Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 2010 Oct;58(4):457-75. doi: 10.1080/00207144.2010.499350.
This study compared the efficacy of conventional treatments for dentin hypersensitivity (DHS) and hypnotherapy. During a 1-month period at an urban practice in a service area of approximately 22,000 inhabitants, all patients were examined. A total of 102 individuals were included in the evaluation. Values of 186 teeth were analyzed. The comparison of the different treatment methods (desensitizer, fluoridation, and hypnotherapy) did not show significant differences in success rates. However, a noticeable difference was observed in terms of onset and duration of effect. For both desensitizer and hypnotherapy treatments, onset of effect was very rapid. Compared to the other methods studied, hypnotherapy effects had the longest duration. In conclusion, hypnotherapy was as effective as other methods in the treatment of DHS.
本研究比较了常规治疗牙本质过敏症（DHS）和催眠疗法的疗效。在一个约有 22000 名居民的服务区的城市诊所进行了为期 1 个月的研究，对所有患者进行了检查。共有 102 人参与了评估。分析了 186 颗牙齿的值。不同治疗方法（脱敏剂、氟化和催眠疗法）的比较显示，成功率没有显著差异。然而，在作用的起始和持续时间方面观察到了明显的差异。对于脱敏剂和催眠疗法治疗，作用的起始非常迅速。与所研究的其他方法相比，催眠疗法的效果持续时间最长。总之，催眠疗法在 DHS 的治疗中与其他方法同样有效。
