Adjunctive use of hypnosis for clinical pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Systematic reviews suggest that stand-alone hypnotic suggestions may improve pain outcomes compared with no treatment, waitlist, or usual care. However, in clinical practice, hypnosis is often provided adjunctively with other interventions, which might have different effects than those reported in previous reviews. This systematic review aimed to summarize the analgesic effects of adjunctive hypnosis in adults with clinical pain. Seven databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Emcare, SCOPUS, CENTRAL, Cochrane) were searched up to January 2024. Randomised controlled trials comparing the analgesic effects of adjunctive hypnosis (hypnosis + primary intervention) with those of the primary intervention alone were included. Meta-analyses (random-effects model) calculated mean differences (MD, [95% confidence intervals]) for pain intensity (0-100). Seventy studies were pooled in meta-analyses (n = 6078). Hypnosis adjunctive to usual care had a small additional analgesic effect (chronic pain: -8.2 [-11.8, -1.9]; medical procedures/surgical pain: -6.9 [-10.4, -3.3]; burn wound care: -8.8 [-13.8, -3.9]). Hypnosis adjunctive to education had a medium additional analgesic effect for chronic pain (-11.5 [-19.7, 3.3]) but not postsurgery pain (-2.0 [-7.8, 3.7]). When paired with psychological interventions, hypnosis slightly increased analgesia in chronic pain only at the three-month follow-up (-2 [-3.7, -0.3]). Hypnosis adjunctive to medicines had a medium additional analgesic effect for chronic pain (-13.2, [-22.5, -3.8]). The overall evidence certainty is very low; therefore, there is still uncertainty about the analgesic effects of adjunctive hypnosis. However, hypnosis adjunct to education may reduce pain intensity for chronic pain. Clarification of proposed therapeutic targets of adjunctive hypnosis to evaluate underlying mechanisms is warranted.

Reframe the pain: Divided attention and positive memory reframing to reduce needle pain and distress in children-A feasibility randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Negative experiences of needle procedures in childhood can lead to medical avoidance and vaccine hesitancy into adulthood. We evaluated the feasibility of two new interventions provided by clinical nurses to reduce the negative impact of vaccinations: divided attention (DA) and positive memory reframing (PMR). METHODS: Children (8-12 years) were randomized into four groups: usual care (UC), DA, PMR or combined (DA + PMR). To evaluate feasibility, we undertook in-depth analysis of video-recorded interventions, nurse experiences (phone interviews) and child/parent memory recall of interventions (phone interviews at 2 weeks post-vaccination). Key clinical outcomes included child and parent ratings of needle-related pain intensity and fear assessed at baseline, immediately post-vaccination and 2 weeks post-vaccination (recalled). RESULTS: A total of 54 child-parent dyads were screened, with 41 included (10/group, except PMR [n = 11]). The interventions were not always completed as intended: 10%-22% of participants received complete interventions and two had adverse events related to protocol breach. Preliminary within-group analyses showed no effects on child/parent pain ratings. However, children in DA + PMR had reduced recalled fear (p = 0.008), and PMR (p = 0.025) and DA + PMR (p = 0.003) had reduced fear of future needles. Parent ratings of child fear were also reduced immediately post-vaccination for UC (p = 0.035) and PMR (p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: The interventions were feasible, although enhanced nurse training is required to improve fidelity. Preliminary clinical results appear promising, particularly for reducing needle-related fear. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: Protocol number ACTRN12618000687291 at ANZCTR.org.au SIGNIFICANCE: Two new nurse-led interventions to reduce negative impacts of vaccinations in children, divided attention and positive memory reframing, were feasible and may reduce needle-related fear. Nurses were able to deliver the interventions in various environments including non-clinical settings (schools). These interventions have potential to facilitate broader dissemination of vaccinations for children in a manner that minimizes distress.

Suggestions in Hypnosis to Aid Pain Education (SHAPE) in People with Chronic Low-Back Pain: A Pilot Feasibility Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a debilitating and burdensome condition, and new treatment strategies are needed. This study aimed to evaluate (1) the feasibility of undertaking a controlled clinical trial investigating a novel intervention for people with CLBP: hypnotically reinforced pain science education, and (2) the acceptability of the intervention as rated by participants. A priori feasibility and intervention acceptability criteria were set. Twenty participants with CLBP were recruited and randomized to receive: (1) hypnotically delivered pain science education that utilizes hypnotic suggestions to enhance uptake of pain science concepts; or (2) pain science education with progressive muscle relaxation as an attention control. Twenty participants were recruited, however, not solely from the hospital waitlist as intended; community sampling was required (13 hospital, 7 community). Most criteria were met in the community sample but not the hospital sample. Protocol modifications are needed before progressing to a full scale randomized controlled trial for hypnotically reinforced pain science education. Improvements in relevant secondary outcomes paired with moderate-high treatment acceptability ratings are promising.

Validation of the Bath CRPS Body Perception Disturbance Scale.

The Bath Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Body Perception Disturbance Scale ("B-CRPS-BPDS") measures alterations in body perception. We assessed its internal consistency, known group validity, construct validity, and associations with demographic and clinical characteristics. We also evaluated changes in, and baseline predictors of B-CRPS-BPDS scores at follow-up. We included people with CRPS (N = 114) and pain-free controls (N = 69). People with CRPS obtained higher scores than pain-free controls on all B-CRPS-BPDS items, except the item on attention. Because this item also had an insufficient corrected item-total correlation, we propose a revised B-CRPS-BPDS (r-B-CRPS-BPDS) excluding this item. The internal consistency of the r-B-CRPS-BPDS was good. The r-B-CRPS-BPDS showed a large positive relationship with "motor neglect-like symptoms", indicating good construct validity. The r-B-CRPS-BPDS showed positive relationships with pain intensity, fear of movement, depression, and upper limb disability. There were no independent relationships with handedness, affected side, affected limb, disease duration, CRPS severity score, tension, anger, fatigue, confusion, and vigour. Finally, r-B-CRPS-BPDS scores did not consistently change over time. Our results demonstrate the utility of the r-B-CRPS-BPDS for measuring body perception disturbances in CRPS. PERSPECTIVE: This article evaluates the validity of the Bath Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Body Perception Disturbance Scale ("B-CRPS-BPDS") in CRPS, and assesses relationships with demographic and clinical variables. The proposed revised B-CRPS-BPDS appears to be a valid measure of body perception disturbances in CRPS.

A pain science education and walking program to increase physical activity in people with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Nine of 10 people with knee osteoarthritis are inactive. Unhelpful pain beliefs may negatively influence physical activity levels. Targeting these unhelpful pain beliefs, through contemporary pain science education (PSE), may provide benefit. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the feasibility of conducting a clinical trial to determine the effect of adding PSE (vs adding sham ultrasound) to an individualised, physiotherapist-led education and walking program in people with painful knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: Twenty participants were randomised (1:1) into the PSE group or Control group, each receiving 4 in-person weekly treatments, then 4 weeks of at-home activities (weekly telephone check-in). Clinical outcomes and physical activity (7 days of wrist-worn accelerometry) were assessed at baseline, 4 (clinical outcomes only), 8, and 26 weeks. A priori feasibility criteria for recruitment, intervention adherence, viability of wrist-based accelerometry, and follow-up retention were set. Perceived intervention credibility, acceptability, and usefulness from participants and clinicians were assessed (ratings, written/verbal feedback). RESULTS: Most feasibility criteria were met. On average, 7 adults/wk were eligible, with 70% recruited. Treatment compliance was high (in-person: 80% PSE; 100% Control; at-home: 78% PSE; 75% Control). Wrist-based accelerometry had >75% valid wear-time. Sufficient follow-up rates were not achieved (26 weeks: 65%). Participant and clinician feedback highlighted that PSE was too complex and did not match patient expectations of "physiotherapy", that sham ultrasound was problematic (clinician), but that both treatments had high credibility, acceptability, and usefulness. CONCLUSIONS: Progression to a full trial is warranted. Strategies to increase participant retention, refine the PSE content/delivery, and replace/remove the sham intervention are required.