HypnosIS to faciLitate trans-Esophageal echocardiograPhy Tolerance: The I-SLEPT study

Hypnosis as a non-pharmacological intervention for invasive medical procedures - A systematic review and meta-analytic update

Hypnosis is recognized as an effective non-pharmacological intervention for managing anxiety, pain, and physiological stress during invasive medical procedures. Despite its growing use, variability in techniques and inconsistent outcome measurements have challenged its clinical standardization. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the effectiveness of hypnosis in reducing anxiety, pain, and physiological stress during invasive procedures, while identifying the most effective techniques as well as assessing analgesic use and safety. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating hypnosis in invasive procedures. Eligible studies were assessed for bias using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Meta-analyses were performed with a random-effects model, and subgroup analyses were conducted based on hypnosis techniques, patient characteristics, and procedure types. Twenty RCTs with 1250 patients were included. Hypnosis significantly reduced anxiety (SMD = -0.43, 95 % CI: -0.58 to -0.28, p < 0.001) and pain (SMD = -0.35, 95 % CI: -0.50 to -0.20, p < 0.001) compared to standard care. Subgroup analyses indicated that virtual reality-enhanced hypnosis and tailored interventions for high-anxiety procedures were most beneficial. Physiological stress markers, including heart rate and blood pressure, were also reduced, supporting the calming effects of hypnosis. Adverse effects were minimal. Hypnosis is effective and safe for reducing anxiety and pain during invasive medical procedures. Standardized protocols and further research are needed to optimize its clinical use and enhance adoption in routine care.

Effectiveness of Hypnosis for the Prevention of Anxiety During Coronary Angiography (HYPCOR study): a prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND

Coronary angiography is the gold standard for the diagnosis of coronary artery disease. This intervention is nevertheless a source of anxiety for the patient both by its discomfort and by the consequences linked to the discovery of potential diseases.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine the effectiveness of hypnosis in reducing anxiety in patients undergoing coronary angiography.

METHODS

One hundred sixty-nine patients with planned coronary angiography and no history of coronary angiography were randomized to a hypnosis or control group. Patients in the hypnosis group underwent a hypnosis session with self-hypnosis posthypnotic suggestions, while those in the control group had a conversational interview with the hypnotherapist. The primary endpoint was pre-exam anxiety level assessed by the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Y A).

RESULTS

Performing a hypnosis session did not result in a significant decrease in anxiety before the intervention. Age, high trait anxiety, high state anxiety the day before, and belief that hypnosis works in general were associated with increased anxiety before the procedure. No adverse events were reported after hypnosis. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups for the occurrence of complications of the intervention.

CONCLUSION

In this study, performing a hypnosis session before coronary angiography did not reduce the state of anxiety measured just before the intervention. In all cases, the hypnotic experience appears to be positive for the patient, encouraging further research efforts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The research protocol has been registered on the ClinicalTrials.gov registry (NCT02818101; 29/06/2016) and with the ANSM (IDRCB 2016-A00205-46; 02/02/2016).

Hypnosis Versus Placebo During Atrial Flutter Ablation: The PAINLESS Study: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the superiority of hypnosis versus placebo on pain perception and morphine consumption during typical atrial flutter (AFL) ablation.

BACKGROUND

AFL ablation commonly requires intravenous opioid for analgesia, which can be associated with adverse outcomes. Hypnosis is an alternative technique with rising interest, but robust data in electrophysiological procedures are lacking.

METHODS

This single center, randomized controlled trial compared hypnosis and placebo during AFl ablation. In addition to the randomized intervention, all patients were treated according to the institution's standard of care analgesia protocol (administration of 1 mg of intravenous morphine in case of self-reported pain ≥5 on an 11-point numeric rating scale or on demand). The primary endpoint was perceived pain quantified by patients using a visual analog scale.

RESULTS

Between October 2017 and September 2019, 113 patients (mean age 70 ± 12 years, 21% women) were randomized to hypnosis (n = 56) or placebo (n = 57). Mean pain score was 4.0 ± 2.2 in the hypnosis group versus 5.5 ± 1.8 in the placebo group (p < 0.001). Pain perception, assessed every 5 min during the whole procedure, was consistently lower in the hypnosis group. Patients' sedation scores were also better in the hypnosis group than in the placebo group (8.3 ± 2.2 vs. 5.4 ± 2.5; p < 0.001). Finally, morphine requirements were significantly lower in the hypnosis group (1.3 ± 1.3 mg) compared with the placebo group (3.6 ± 1.8 mg; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this first randomized trial, hypnosis during AFL ablation was superior to placebo for alleviating pain and reducing morphine consumption.

Transoesophageal echocardiography current practice in France: A multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Few data are available on the application of transoesophageal echocardiography (TOE) recommendations in daily practice.

AIMS

To evaluate TOE practice based on echocardiography societies' guidelines, and to determine complication rates and factors associated with patient feelings.

METHODS

Between April and June 2017, we prospectively included all consecutive patients referred to 14 French hospitals for a transoesophageal echocardiogram (TOE). A survey was taken just after the examination, which included questions about pre-procedural anxiety, and any pain, unpleasant feeling or breathing difficulties experienced during the examination.

RESULTS

Overall, 1718 TOEs were performed, mainly for stroke evaluation. A standardized operating procedure checklist was completed in half of the patients before the examination. TOE was unpleasant for 62.4% of patients, but was stopped for agitation or intolerance in 3.5 and 1.4% of cases, respectively. We observed one severe complication (pulmonary oedema). The mean TOE duration was short (9.2±4.6minutes), but was longer with residents than with more experienced physicians (11±4.7 vs. 8.8±4.7minutes for junior physicians [P=0.0027]; vs. 8.9±4.8minutes for senior physicians [P=0.0013]; and vs. 7.5±4.1minutes for associate professors/professors [P<0.0001]). The visual analogue scale (VAS) score after TOE was good (8.3±1.7 out of 10), and was better in patients with general anaesthesia (GA) than in those without GA (9.3±0.9 vs. 8.1±1.7; P<0.0001). In patients without GA, the VAS score was similar with and without local anaesthesia (8.1±1.7 vs. 8.2±1.6; P=0.19). After multivariable adjustment, absence of anxiety before TOE and greater operator experience were consistently associated with a higher VAS score.

CONCLUSIONS

TOE is safe, with a low rate of complications and few stops for intolerance. A shorter TOE duration and better patient feelings were observed for experienced operators, highlighting the importance of the learning curve, and paving the way for teaching on a TOE simulator.

Effectiveness of two psychological interventions for pain management, emotional regulation and promotion of quality of life among adult Portuguese men with haemophilia (PSY-HaEMOPEQ): study protocol for a single-centre prospective randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Haemophilia is a bleeding disorder associated with significant pain, emotional distress, quality of life (QoL) impairment and considerable healthcare costs. Psychosocial health and effective pain management are considered essential end points for optimal haemophilia care, but there is a significant gap in evidence-based treatments targeting these outcomes in people with haemophilia (PWH). Psychological interventions are cost-effective in promoting emotional well-being, QoL and pain control, although these have been scarcely used in haemophilia field. This investigation aims to evaluate the effectiveness of two psychological interventions for pain management, emotional regulation and promotion of QoL in PWH.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a single-centre parallel randomised controlled trial conducted at a European Haemophilia Comprehensive Care Centre in Portugal, with five assessment points: baseline (T0), postintervention (T1), 3 (T2), 6 (T3) and 12 (T4) months follow-up. Eligible adult males, with moderate or severe haemophilia A or B will be randomised to experimental (EG) or control (CG) group. Intervention is either cognitive-behavioural therapy (EG1) or hypnosis (EG2), both consisting of four weekly sessions following standardised scripts delivered by trained psychologists. Randomisation will be computer generated, allocation concealment will be guaranteed and outcome assessors will be blind to EG/CG allocation. Main outcomes are pain and haemophilia-related QoL and secondary outcomes include clinical (clotting factor replacement consumption, joint bleeding episodes, analgesic intake) and psychological (pain coping strategies, anxiety, depression, illness perceptions) variables, functional assessment of the joints, inflammatory biomarkers (cytokines, high-sensitivity C reactive protein) and white blood cell count.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study was approved by the competent authorities and all procedures will comply with international ethical guidelines for clinical studies involving humans. Written informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The dissemination plan includes peer-reviewed scientific publications, conference participation and web and media coverage.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02870452.