Hypnosis antenatal training for childbirth: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the use of pharmacologic analgesia during childbirth when antenatal hypnosis is added to standard care. DESIGN: Randomised controlled clinical trial, conducted from December 2005 to December 2010. SETTING: The largest tertiary referral centre for maternity care in South Australia. POPULATION: A cohort of 448 women at >34 weeks of gestation, with a singleton pregnancy and cephalic presentation, planning a vaginal birth. Exclusions were: the need for an interpreter; pre-existing pain; psychiatric illness; younger than 18 years; and previous experience of hypnosis for childbirth. METHODS: All participants received usual care. The group of women termed Hypnosis + CD (hypnotherapist guided) were offered three antenatal live hypnosis sessions plus each session's corresponding audio CD for further practise, as well as a final fourth CD to listen to during labour. The group of women termed CD only (nurse administered) were played the same antenatal hypnosis CDs as group 1, but did not receive live hypnosis training. The control group participants were given no additional intervention or CDs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Use of pharmacological analgesia during labour and childbirth. RESULTS: No difference in the use of pharmacological analgesia during labour and childbirth was found comparing hypnosis + CD with control (81.2 versus 76.2%; relative risk, RR 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 95% CI 0.95-1.20), or comparing CD only with control (76.9 versus 76.2%, RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.89-1.15). CONCLUSIONS: Antenatal group hypnosis using the Hypnosis Antenatal Training for Childbirth (HATCh) intervention in late pregnancy does not reduce the use of pharmacological analgesia during labour and childbirth.

Anaesthetists' risk assessment of placebo nerve block studies using the SHAM (Serious Harm and Morbidity) scale.

The SHAM (Serious Harm and Morbidity) scale was developed to categorise the severity of potential complications of placebo control interventions in the context of local anaesthesia research. A convenience sample of 43 anaesthetists used the SHAM scale to grade ten published randomised controlled trials investigating local anaesthesia nerve blocks. The Fleiss κ statistic assessed agreement between these anaesthetists and probability of random agreement (Pr(e)) when using the SHAM scale; a κ > 0 shows concordance between assessors above random agreement. Overall κ was 0.50 (95% CI 0.49-0.51, p < 0.001), Pr(e) = 0.21. There was moderate agreement between assessors in determining whether studies were low-risk (SHAM score 0-2) or high-risk (SHAM score 3-4) (κ 0.60 (95% CI 0.58-0.62), Pr(e) = 0.51). Compared with anaesthetists given clinical examples of interventions when applying the SHAM score, anaesthetists who were not given examples showed significantly less inter-individual agreement (κ 0.76 (95% CI 0.72-0.81), Pr(e) = 0.5 vs 0.45 (95% CI 0.41-0.49), Pr(e) = 0.52, p < 0.0001). These results suggest that the SHAM score can be successfully used to grade the severity of potential complications of placebo-controlled interventions in local anaesthesia research and represent a first step towards the score's validation.

Complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour.

BACKGROUND: Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour and this may contribute towards the popularity of complementary methods of pain management. This review examined currently available evidence supporting the use of alternative and complementary therapies for pain management in labour. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour on maternal and perinatal morbidity. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group's Trials Register (February 2006), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2006, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to February 2006), EMBASE (1980 to February 2006) and CINAHL (1980 to February 2006). SELECTION CRITERIA: The inclusion criteria included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing complementary and alternative therapies (but not biofeedback) with placebo, no treatment or pharmacological forms of pain management in labour. All women whether primiparous or multiparous, and in spontaneous or induced labour, in the first and second stage of labour were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Meta-analysis was performed using relative risks for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences for continuous outcomes. The outcome measures were maternal satisfaction, use of pharmacological pain relief and maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Fourteen trials were included in the review with data reporting on 1537 women using different modalities of pain management; 1448 women were included in the meta-analysis. Three trials involved acupuncture (n = 496), one audio-analgesia (n = 24), two trials acupressure (n = 172), one aromatherapy (n = 22), five trials hypnosis (n = 729), one trial of massage (n = 60), and relaxation (n = 34). The trials of acupuncture showed a decreased need for pain relief (relative risk (RR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.49 to 1.00, two trials 288 women). Women taught self-hypnosis had decreased requirements for pharmacological analgesia (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.79, five trials 749 women) including epidural analgesia (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.40) and were more satisfied with their pain management in labour compared with controls (RR 2.33, 95% CI 1.15 to 4.71, one trial). No differences were seen for women receiving aromatherapy, or audio analgesia. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture and hypnosis may be beneficial for the management of pain during labour; however, the number of women studied has been small. Few other complementary therapies have been subjected to proper scientific study.

Antenatal self-hypnosis for labour and childbirth: a pilot study.

UNLABELLED: In our institution we have used antenatal training in self-hypnosis for over three years as a tool to provide relaxation, anxiolysis and analgesia for women in labour. To assess the effects of hypnotherapy, we prospectively collected data related to the use of hypnosis in preparation for childbirth, and compared the birth outcomes of women experiencing antenatal hypnosis with parity and gestational age matched controls. METHODS: Prospective data about women taught self-hypnosis in preparation for childbirth were collected between August 2002 and August 2004. Birth outcome data of women using hypnosis were compared with routinely collected retrospective data from parity and gestational age matched women delivering after 37 weeks gestation during 2003. RESULTS: Seventy-seven antenatal women consecutively taught self-hypnosis in preparation for childbirth were compared with 3,249 parity and gestational age matched controls. Of the women taught antenatal self-hypnosis, nulliparous parturients used fewer epidurals: 36% (18/50) compared with 53% (765/1436) of controls (RR 0.68 [95%CI 0.47-0.98]); and required less augmentation: 18% (9/50) vs 36% (523/1436) (RR 0.48 [95%CI 0.27-0.90]). CONCLUSIONS: Our clinical findings are consistent with recent meta-analyses showing beneficial outcomes associated with the use of hypnosis in childbirth. Adequately powered, randomized trials are required to further elucidate the effects of hypnosis preparation for childbirth.

Suggestion, hypnosis and hypnotherapy: a survey of use, knowledge and attitudes of anaesthetists.

Clinical hypnosis is a skill of using words and gestures (frequently called suggestions) in particular ways to achieve specific outcomes. It is being increasingly recognised as a useful intervention for managing a range of symptoms, especially pain and anxiety. We surveyed all 317 South Australian Fellows and trainees registered with ANZCA to determine their use, knowledge of, and attitudes towards positive suggestion, hypnosis and hypnotherapy in their anaesthesia practice. The response rate was 218 anaesthetists (69%). The majority of respondents (63%) rated their level of knowledge on this topic as below average. Forty-eight per cent of respondents indicated that there was a role for hypnotherapy in clinical anaesthesia, particularly in areas seen as traditional targets for the modality, i.e. pain and anxiety states. Nearly half of the anaesthetists supported the use of hypnotherapy and positive suggestions within clinical anaesthesia. Those respondents who had experience of clinical hypnotherapy were more likely to support hypnosis teaching at undergraduate or postgraduate level when compared with those with no experience.

Hypnosis for pain relief in labour and childbirth: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: In view of widespread claims of efficacy, we examined the evidence regarding the effects of hypnosis for pain relief during childbirth. METHODS: Medline, Embase, Pubmed, and the Cochrane library 2004.1 were searched for clinical trials where hypnosis during pregnancy and childbirth was compared with a non-hypnosis intervention, no treatment or placebo. Reference lists from retrieved papers and hypnotherapy texts were also examined. There were no language restrictions. Our primary outcome measures were labour analgesia requirements (no analgesia, opiate, or epidural use), and pain scores in labour. Suitable comparative studies were included for further assessment according to predefined criteria. Meta-analyses were performed of the included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), assessed as being of "good" or "adequate" quality by a predefined score. RESULTS: Five RCTs and 14 non-randomized comparisons (NRCs) studying 8395 women were identified where hypnosis was used for labour analgesia. Four RCTs including 224 patients examined the primary outcomes of interest. One RCT rated poor on quality assessment. Meta-analyses of the three remaining RCTs showed that, compared with controls, fewer parturients having hypnosis required analgesia, relative risk=0.51 (95% confidence interval 0.28, 0.95). Of the two included NRCs, one showed that women using hypnosis rated their labour pain less severe than controls (P<0.01). The other showed that hypnosis reduced opioid (meperidine) requirements (P<0.001), and increased the incidence of not requiring pharmacological analgesia in labour (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: The risk/benefit profile of hypnosis demonstrates a need for well-designed trials to confirm the effects of hypnosis in childbirth.

Complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour.

BACKGROUND: Many women would like to avoid pharmacological or invasive methods of pain management in labour and this may contribute towards the popularity of complementary methods of pain management. This review examined currently available evidence supporting the use of alternative and complementary therapies for pain management in labour. OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of complementary and alternative therapies for pain management in labour on maternal and perinatal morbidity. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth Group trials register (July 2002), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (The Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2002), MEDLINE (1966 to July 2002), EMBASE (1980 to July 2002) and CINAHL (1980 to July 2002). SELECTION CRITERIA: The inclusion criteria included published and unpublished randomised controlled trials comparing complementary and alternative therapies with placebo, no treatment or pharmacological forms of pain management in labour. All women whether primiparous or multiparous, and in spontaneous or induced labour, in the first and second stage of labour were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Meta-analysis was performed using relative risks for dichotomous outcomes and weighted mean differences for continuous outcomes. The outcome measures were maternal satisfaction, use of pharmacological pain relief and maternal and neonatal adverse outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: Seven trials involving 366 women and using different modalities of pain management were included in this review. The trials included one involving acupuncture (n = 100), one involving audio-analgesia (n = 25), one involving aromatherapy (n = 22), three trials of hypnosis (n = 189) and one trial of music (n = 30). The trial of acupuncture decreased the need for pain relief (relative risk (RR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39 to 0.81). Women receiving hypnosis were more satisfied with their pain management in labour compared with controls (RR 2.33, 95% CI 1.55 to 4.71). No differences were seen for women receiving aromatherapy, music or audio analgesia. REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS: Acupuncture and hypnosis may be beneficial for the management of pain during labour. However, few complementary therapies have been subjected to proper scientific study and the number of women studied is small.