RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Fibromyalgia is a chronic syndrome marked by intense musculoskeletal pain often refractory to pharmacological treatment. Although studies have shown that hypnosis improves fibromyalgia pain, gaps in experimental design limit their reliability. This work aimed to evaluate the effects of hypnosis on pain, mental health, sleep, and quality of life in participants with fibromyalgia chronic pain. METHODS: In this prospective, parallel, randomized, controlled, blindly-evaluated trial, participants of both sexes (n = 49) diagnosed with fibromyalgia and with moderate to severe chronic pain attended 8 weekly 1-h sessions with a hypnotherapist. For the hypnosis group (n = 24), sessions consisted in induction of hypnotic trance followed by suggestions to promote analgesia. For the control group (n = 25), sessions consisted in casual unscripted conversation. Participants were assessed at baseline (7 days before), post-intervention (7 days after), and follow-up (3 months after). The primary outcome was pain intensity. The secondary outcomes were the sensory and affective dimensions of pain; pain unpleasantness; pain catastrophizing; anxiety and depression; sleep quality; fibromyalgia impact; and quality of life. RESULTS: Hypnosis significantly reduced pain scores both at post-intervention and follow-up in comparison with baseline. The analgesic effect of hypnosis combined with pharmacological treatment lasted for at least 3 months and was superior to analgesia promoted by first- and second-line pharmacological treatment alone. Hypnosis significantly improved all parameters evaluated as secondary outcomes both at post-intervention and follow-up without inducing adverse events. CONCLUSION: Our results corroborate that clinical hypnosis is an effective and feasible tool for managing chronic pain and other symptoms of fibromyalgia.
RESUMEN
Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) represents a group of cardiovascular risk factors. This article aims to evaluate the accuracy of the tools of MetS diagnosis in Nursing professionals from Primary Health Care (PHC) in Bahia, Brazil. A cross-sectional study with a random sample selected according to essential health information for the diagnostic of MetS. For MetS diagnostic, we used EGIR, NCEP-ATPIII, AACE, IDF, Barbosa et al. (2006), and IDF/AHA/NHLBI (defined as gold standard) definition. Sensitivity, specificity, predictive values, and likelihood ratio were estimated for each diagnostic tool and compared with the gold standard. Kappa statistic was used to determine the agreement between the diagnostic methods. One thousand one hundred and eleven nursing professionals were included in this study. Sensitivity varied from 15% to 95.1%, and specificity varied between 99.5% and 100%. IDF and Barbosa et al. (2006) definitions were more sensitive (95.1% and 92.8%, respectively), and EGIR, NCEP, ATP III, and IDF showed 100% specificity. IDF and Barbosa et al. (2006) use suitable metabolic syndrome identification and confirmation criteria. The highest agreement was found in the definition of the IDF, Barbosa et al. (2006) and the NCEP ATP III. Defining metabolic syndrome with a higher diagnostic accuracy could contribute to the screening and the early identification of nursing professionals with cardiovascular disease risk factors, which provide opportunities for appropriate prevention and treatment.
