Medical hypnosis mitigates laboratory dyspnoea in healthy humans: a randomised, controlled experimental trial.

QUESTION: Dyspnoea persisting despite treatments of underlying causes requires symptomatic approaches. Medical hypnosis could provide relief without the untoward effects of pharmacological approaches. We addressed this question through experimentally induced dyspnoea in healthy humans (inspiratory threshold loading (excessive inspiratory effort) and carbon dioxide stimulation (air hunger)). MATERIAL AND METHODS: 20 volunteers (10 women, aged 21-40 years) were studied on four separate days. The order of the visits was randomised in two steps: firstly, the "inspiratory threshold loading first" versus "carbon dioxide first" group (n=10 in each group); secondly, the "medical hypnosis first" versus "visual distraction first" subgroup (n=5 in each subgroup). Each visit comprised three 5-min periods (reference, intervention, washout) during which participants used visual analogue scales (VAS) to rate the sensory and affective dimensions of dyspnoea, and after which they completed the Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile. RESULTS: Medical hypnosis reduced both dimensions of dyspnoea significantly more than visual distraction (inspiratory threshold loading: sensory reduction after 5 min 34% of full VAS versus 8% (p=0.0042), affective reduction 17.6% versus 2.4% (p=0.044); carbon dioxide: sensory reduction after 5 min 36.9% versus 3% (p=0.0015), affective reduction 29.1% versus 8.7% (p=0.0023)). The Multidimensional Dyspnea Profile showed more marked sensory effects during inspiratory threshold loading and more marked affective effects during carbon dioxide stimulation. ANSWER TO THE QUESTION: Medical hypnosis was more effective than visual distraction at attenuating the sensory and affective dimensions of experimentally induced dyspnoea. This provides a strong rationale for clinical studies of hypnosis in persistent dyspnoea patients.

Mid-term pulmonary sequelae after hospitalisation for COVID-19: The French SISCOVID cohort.

BACKGROUND: Even though COVID-19 clinical features, pathogenesis, complications, and therapeutic options have been largely described in the literature, long-term consequences in patients remain poorly known. METHODS: The French, multicentre, non-interventional SISCOVID study evaluated lung impairment three (M3) and six months (M6) after hospital discharge in patients recovered from COVID-19. Evaluation was based on clinical examination, pulmonary function tests, and chest computed tomography (CT-scan). RESULTS: Of the 320 included patients (mean age: 61 years; men: 64.1%), 205 had had a severe form of COVID-19, being hospitalised in an intensive care unit (ICU), and requiring high flow nasal cannula, non-invasive ventilation, or invasive mechanical ventilation. At M6, 54.1% of included patients had persistent dyspnoea (mMRC score ≥1), 20.1% severe impairment in gas diffusing capacity (DLCO <60% pred.), 21.6% restrictive ventilatory pattern (total lung capacity <80% pred.), and 40% a fibrotic-like pattern at CT-scan. Fibrotic-like pattern and restrictive ventilatory pattern were significantly more frequent in patients recovered from severe than non-severe COVID-19. Improved functional and radiological outcomes were observed between M3 and M6. At M6, age was an independent risk factor for severe DLco impairment and fibrotic-like pattern and severe COVID-19 form was independent risk factor for restrictive ventilatory profile and fibrotic-like pattern. CONCLUSION: Six months after discharge, patients hospitalised for COVID-19, especially those recovered from a severe form of COVID-19, frequently presented persistent dyspnoea, lung function impairment, and persistent fibrotic-like pattern, confirming the need for long-term post-discharge follow-up in these patients and for further studies to better understand long-term COVID-19 lung impairment.