Brugnoli Maria Paola, Pesce Giancarlo, Pasin Emanuela, Basile Maria Francesca, Tamburin Stefano, Polati Enrico
Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care and Pain Therapy, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Department of Diagnostics and Public Health, University of Verona, Verona, Italy.
Ann Palliat Med. 2018 Jan;7(1):17-31. doi: 10.21037/apm.2017.10.03. Epub 2017 Dec 12.
Patients with severe chronic diseases and advanced cancer receiving palliative care, have a complex range of pain and anxiety that can arise early in the course of illness. We studied two groups of patients with severe chronic diseases who participated in a nonrandomized clinical trial of early integration of clinical hypnosis in palliative care versus standard pharmacological care. The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate whether a long-term intervention of 2 years with clinical hypnosis and self-hypnosis as an adjuvant therapy in chronic pain and anxiety, is more effective than pharmacological therapy alone.
The study was performed at the Center of Anesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Therapy at the University of Verona, Italy. The study population consisted of 50 patients, 25 in the hypnosis group and 25 in the control group. Fourteen men and 36 women participated in the study. Evaluations with Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain and Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) for anxiety and the evaluation of the use of opioids and analgesic medicines were conducted at baseline and for a long-term follow-up (after 1 and 2 years).
The two groups were homogeneous in the distribution of sex, age, type and subtypes of diseases and use of opioids and analgesic medicines at baseline. The patients suffered from 3 main types of severe chronic diseases: rheumatic (n=21), neurologic (n=16) and oncologic (n=13). The VAS score at baseline was similar in both the hypnosis group and control group (mean ± standard deviation, SD: 78±16 and 77±14, respectively). The average VAS value for the hypnosis group decreased from 81.9±14.6 at baseline to 45.9±13.8 at 1-year follow-up, to 38.9±12.4 at 2-year follow-up. The average VAS value for the control group decreased from 78.5±14.8 at baseline, to 62.1±15.4 at 1-year follow-up, to 57.1±15.9 at 2-year follow-up. The variance analysis indicated that the decrease in perceived pain was more significant in the hypnosis group patients than in the control group, after 1- and 2-year follow-up (P=0.0001). The average HAM-A Hamilton anxiety score decreased from 32.6 at baseline to 22.9 and 17.1 respectively at 1-year and 2-year follow-up for the hypnosis group, but it remained almost the same in the control group (29.8, 26.1 and 28.5 at baseline, first and second year respectively). ANOVA showed that the difference between the two groups was statistically significant (P<0.0001). Univariate analysis showed a 4-times greater risk of increasing analgesic medicines and opioids in the control group (adj.IRR: 4.36; 95% CI: 1.59-12.0) after 2-year follow-up.
The patient group receiving hypnosis as an adjuvant therapy showed a statistically significant decrease in pain and anxiety and a significantly lower risk of increasing pharmacological pain treatment in a long term follow-up after 1 and 2 years compared to the control group. Clinical hypnosis can be considered an effective adjuvant therapy for pain and anxiety control in cancer as well as in severe chronic diseases for patients receiving palliative care.
接受姑息治疗的严重慢性病和晚期癌症患者,在疾病过程早期会出现一系列复杂的疼痛和焦虑症状。我们研究了两组患有严重慢性病的患者,他们参与了一项非随机临床试验,比较了姑息治疗中早期整合临床催眠与标准药物治疗的效果。本研究的目的是评估以临床催眠和自我催眠作为辅助治疗慢性疼痛和焦虑的两年长期干预措施,是否比单纯药物治疗更有效。
该研究在意大利维罗纳大学麻醉学、重症监护与疼痛治疗中心进行。研究人群包括50名患者,催眠组25名,对照组25名。共有14名男性和36名女性参与了研究。在基线期以及长期随访(1年和2年后)时,使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估疼痛程度,使用汉密尔顿焦虑量表(HAM - A)评估焦虑程度,并评估阿片类药物和镇痛药的使用情况。
两组在基线期的性别、年龄、疾病类型和亚型以及阿片类药物和镇痛药的使用分布上具有同质性。患者患有3种主要类型的严重慢性病:风湿性疾病(n = 21)、神经疾病(n = 16)和肿瘤疾病(n = 13)。催眠组和对照组的基线VAS评分相似(均值±标准差,SD:分别为78±16和77±14)。催眠组的VAS平均分值从基线期的81.9±14.6降至1年随访时的45.9±13.8,再降至2年随访时的38.9±12.4。对照组的VAS平均分值从基线期的78.5±14.8降至1年随访时的62.1±15.4,再降至2年随访时的57.1±15.9。方差分析表明,在1年和2年随访后,催眠组患者感知疼痛的降低幅度比对照组更显著(P = 0.0001)。催眠组的HAM - A汉密尔顿焦虑平均评分从基线期的32.6分别降至1年和2年随访时的22.9和17.1,但对照组几乎保持不变(基线期、第一年和第二年分别为29.8、26.1和28.5)。方差分析显示两组之间的差异具有统计学意义(P < 0.0001)。单因素分析显示,2年随访后,对照组增加镇痛药和阿片类药物的风险高出4倍(调整后发病率比:4.36;95%置信区间:1.59 - 12.0)。
与对照组相比,接受催眠作为辅助治疗的患者组在1年和2年的长期随访后,疼痛和焦虑在统计学上显著降低,且长期增加药物性疼痛治疗的风险显著更低。临床催眠可被视为癌症以及接受姑息治疗的严重慢性病患者控制疼痛和焦虑的有效辅助治疗方法。