Benson H, Frankel F H, Apfel R, Daniels M D, Schniewind H E, Nemiah J C, Sifneos P E, Crassweller K D, Greenwood M M, Kotch J B, Arns P A, Rosner B
Psychother Psychosom. 1978;30(3-4):229-42. doi: 10.1159/000287304.
We have investigated prospectively the efficacy of two nonpharmacologic relaxation techniques in the therapy of anxiety. A simple, meditational relaxation technique (MT) that elicits the changes of decreased sympathetic nervous system activity was compared to a self-hypnosis technique (HT) in which relaxation, with or without altered perceptions, was suggested. 32 patients with anxiety neurosis were divided into 2 groups on the basis of their responsivity to hypnosis: moderate-high and low responsivity. The MT or HT was then randomly assigned separately to each member of the two responsivity groups. Thus, 4 treatment groups were studied: moderate-high responsivity MT; low responsivity MT; moderate-high responsivity HT; and low responsivity HT. The low responsivity HT group, by definition largely incapable of achieving the altered perceptions essential to hypnosis, was designed as the control group. Patients were instructed to practice the assigned technique daily for 8 weeks. Change in anxiety was determined by three types of evaluation: psychiatric assessment; physiologic testing; and self-assessment. There was essentially no difference between the two techniques in therapeutic efficacy according to these evaluations. Psychiatric assessment revealed overall improvement in 34% of the patients and the self-rating assessment indicated improvement in 63% of the population. Patients who had moderate-high hypnotic responsivity, independent of the technique used, significantly improved on psychiatric assessment (p = 0.05) and decreased average systolic blood pressure from 126.1 to 122.5 mm Hg over the 8-week period (p = 0.048). The responsivity scores at the higher end of the hypnotic responsivity spectrum were proportionately correlated to greater decreases in systolic blood pressure (p = 0.075) and to improvement by psychiatric assessment (p = 0.003). There was, however, no consistent relation between hypnotic responsivity and the other assessments made, such as diastolic blood pressure, oxygen consumption, heart rate and the self-rating questionnaires. The meditational and self-hypnosis techniques employed in this investigation are simple to use and effective in the therapy of anxiety.
我们对两种非药物放松技术在焦虑症治疗中的疗效进行了前瞻性研究。将一种能引起交感神经系统活动降低变化的简单冥想放松技术(MT)与一种自我催眠技术(HT)进行比较,自我催眠技术中会暗示放松状态,无论是否伴有感知改变。32例焦虑症患者根据其对催眠的反应性分为两组:中高反应性组和低反应性组。然后将MT或HT分别随机分配给两个反应性组的每个成员。因此,研究了4个治疗组:中高反应性MT组;低反应性MT组;中高反应性HT组;低反应性HT组。低反应性HT组,根据定义在很大程度上无法实现催眠所必需的感知改变,被设计为对照组。患者被指示每天练习指定的技术,持续8周。通过三种评估方式来确定焦虑的变化:精神病学评估;生理测试;以及自我评估。根据这些评估,两种技术在治疗效果上基本没有差异。精神病学评估显示34%的患者总体有所改善,自我评定评估表明63%的患者有所改善。具有中高催眠反应性的患者,无论使用何种技术,在精神病学评估中都有显著改善(p = 0.05),并且在8周内平均收缩压从126.1毫米汞柱降至122.5毫米汞柱(p = 0.048)。催眠反应性谱较高端的反应性得分与收缩压的更大降幅(p = 0.075)以及精神病学评估的改善(p = 0.003)成比例相关。然而,催眠反应性与其他评估指标,如舒张压、耗氧量、心率和自我评定问卷之间没有一致的关系。本研究中采用的冥想和自我催眠技术易于使用,对焦虑症治疗有效。