Br Med J. 1968 Oct 12;4(5623):71-6.
An investigation of hypnosis in asthma was made among patients aged 10 to 60 years with paroxysmal attacks of wheezing or tight chest capable of relief by bronchodilators. One group of patients was given hypnosis monthly and used autohypnosis daily for one year. Comparisons were made with a control group prescribed a specially devised set of breathing exercises aimed at progressive relaxation. Treatment was randomly allocated and patients were treated by physicians in nine centres. Results were assessed by daily diary recordings of wheezing and the use of bronchodilators, and by monthly recordings of F.E.V.(1) and vital capacity. At the end of the year independent clinical assessments were made by physicians unaware of the patients' treatment.There were 252 patients (127 hypnosis and 125 controls) accepted for analysis, but a number of them did not continue the prescribed treatment for the whole year: 28 hypnosis and 22 control patients failed to co-operate, left the district, or had family problems; one hypnosis and one control patient died. Seven hypnosis and 17 control patients were withdrawn as treatment failures, the difference between the two groups being statistically significant.As judged by analyses based on the daily "score" of wheezing recorded in patients' diaries, by the number of times bronchodilators were used, and by independent clinical assessors, both treatment groups showed some improvement Among men the assessments of wheezing score and use of bronchodilators showed similar improvement in the two treatment groups; among women, however, those treated by hypnosis showed improvement similar to that observed in the men, but those given breathing exercises made much less progress, the difference between the two treatment groups reaching statistical significance. Changes in F.E.V.(1) and V.C. between the control and hypnosis groups were closely similar.Independent clinical assessors considered the asthma to be "much better" in 59% of the hypnosis group and in 43% of the control group, the difference being significant There was little difference between the sexes. Physicians with previous experience of hypnosis obtained significantly better results than did those without such experience.
对年龄在10至60岁之间、有喘息或胸闷阵发性发作且能通过支气管扩张剂缓解的哮喘患者进行了催眠研究。一组患者每月接受一次催眠,并每天进行自我催眠,为期一年。与规定进行一套专门设计的旨在逐步放松的呼吸练习的对照组进行了比较。治疗是随机分配的,患者由九个中心的医生进行治疗。通过每日记录喘息情况和支气管扩张剂的使用情况,以及每月记录第一秒用力呼气量(F.E.V.(1))和肺活量来评估结果。在年底,由不知道患者治疗情况的医生进行独立的临床评估。共有252名患者(127名接受催眠治疗,125名作为对照)接受分析,但其中一些患者没有持续接受规定治疗一整年:28名接受催眠治疗的患者和22名对照患者不配合、离开该地区或出现家庭问题;1名接受催眠治疗的患者和1名对照患者死亡。7名接受催眠治疗的患者和17名对照患者因治疗失败而退出,两组之间的差异具有统计学意义。根据患者日记中记录的每日喘息“评分”、支气管扩张剂的使用次数以及独立临床评估者的分析判断,两个治疗组均有一定改善。在男性中,喘息评分和支气管扩张剂使用情况的评估显示两个治疗组有相似的改善;然而,在女性中,接受催眠治疗的女性表现出与男性相似的改善,但接受呼吸练习的女性进展甚微,两个治疗组之间的差异具有统计学意义。对照组和催眠组之间的第一秒用力呼气量(F.E.V.(1))和肺活量变化非常相似。独立临床评估者认为,催眠组中59%的哮喘患者“好多了”,对照组中这一比例为43%,差异显著。两性之间差异不大。有催眠经验的医生取得的结果明显优于没有这种经验的医生。