Effects of hypnotic analgesia and virtual reality on the reduction of experimental pain among high and low hypnotizables.

This research compared a no-treatment control condition and 3 experimentally induced pain treatment conditions: (a) virtual reality distraction (VRD), (b) hypnotic analgesia (HA), and (c) HA + VRD in relieving finger-pressure pain. After receiving baseline pain stimulus, each participant received hypnosis or no hypnosis, followed by VRD or no VRD during another pain stimulus. The data analysis indicated that, overall, all 3 treatments were more effective compared to the control group, irrespective of whether it involved hypnotic analgesia, virtual reality distraction, or both (hypnosis and virtual reality). Nevertheless, the participants responded differently to the pain treatment, depending on the hypnotizability level. High hypnotizables reported hypnotic analgesia, but low hypnotizables did not show hypnotic analgesia. VR distraction reduced pain regardless of hypnotizability.

Virtual reality exposure therapy in anxiety disorders: a quantitative meta-analysis.

Virtual reality exposure therapy (VRET) is a promising intervention for the treatment of the anxiety disorders. The main objective of this meta-analysis is to compare the efficacy of VRET, used in a behavioral or cognitive-behavioral framework, with that of the classical evidence-based treatments, in anxiety disorders. A comprehensive search of the literature identified 23 studies (n = 608) that were included in the final analysis. The results show that in the case of anxiety disorders, (1) VRET does far better than the waitlist control; (2) the post-treatment results show similar efficacy between the behavioral and the cognitive behavioral interventions incorporating a virtual reality exposure component and the classical evidence-based interventions, with no virtual reality exposure component; (3) VRET has a powerful real-life impact, similar to that of the classical evidence-based treatments; (4) VRET has a good stability of results over time, similar to that of the classical evidence-based treatments; (5) there is a dose-response relationship for VRET; and (6) there is no difference in the dropout rate between the virtual reality exposure and the in vivo exposure. Implications are discussed.