The use of hypnosis to improve pain management during voluntary interruption of pregnancy: an open randomized preliminary study

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.

Local anaesthesia for pain control in first trimester surgical abortion

BACKGROUND

Abortions prior to 14 weeks are among the most common outpatient surgical procedures performed on people capable of becoming pregnant. Various methods have been used to control pain; however, many people still experience pain with the procedure.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of local anaesthesia given for pain control during surgical abortion at less than 14 weeks' gestation.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL (Ovid EBM Reviews), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, POPLINE, and Google Scholar to December 2022 for randomized controlled trials of pain control in surgical abortion at less than 14 weeks' gestation using suction aspiration. We searched the reference lists of related reviews and articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected effectiveness and comparative effectiveness randomized controlled trials that studied local anaesthesia with common local anaesthetics and administration routes given for pain control in surgical abortion at less than 14 weeks' gestation using uterine aspiration. Outcomes included intraoperative pain, patient satisfaction, and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. We computed mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous variables reporting a mean. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirteen studies with 1992 participants met the inclusion criteria. Due to heterogeneity of interventions, we could not pool more than two studies for any outcome. We used 13 mm improvement on a visual/verbal analogue scale to indicate a clinically meaningful difference in pain with surgical abortion (pain with dilation, aspiration, or during procedure). Based on type of pain control, we divided studies into three groups. Paracervical block (PCB) effectiveness trials A 20 mL 1% lidocaine PCB reduced pain with dilation (MD -37.00, 95% CI -45.64 to -28.36), and aspiration (MD -26.00, 95% CI -33.48 to -18.52) compared to a sham PCB (1 RCT, 120 participants; high-certainty evidence). A PCB with 14 mL of 1% chloroprocaine resulted in a slight reduction in pain with aspiration compared to a PCB with normal saline injected at two or four sites (MD -1.50, 95% CI -2.45 to -0.55; 1 RCT, 79 participants; high-certainty evidence). PCB comparative effectiveness trials An ultracaine PCB probably results in little to no clinically meaningful difference in pain during procedure compared to topical cervical lidocaine spray (median 1 point higher, interquartile range (IQR) 0 to 3; P < 0.001; 1 RCT, 48 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A 1000 mg dose of intravenous paracetamol probably does not decrease pain as much as ultracaine PCB during procedure (median 2 points higher, IQR 1 to 3; P < 0.001; 1 RCT, 46 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Various local anaesthetics in PCB comparative effectiveness trials A 10 mL buffered 2% lidocaine PCB probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with dilation compared to a plain lidocaine PCB (MD -0.80, 95% CI -0.89 to -0.71; 1 RCT, 167 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). A buffered lidocaine PCB probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with aspiration compared to plain lidocaine PCB (MD -0.57, 95% CI -1.01 to -0.06; 2 RCTs, 291 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Non-PCB local anaesthesia or PCB technique effectiveness trials PCB: waiting versus no waiting Waiting three to five minutes between 1% lidocaine PCB injection and dilation probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with dilation compared to not waiting (MD -0.70, 95% CI -1.23 to -0.17; 2 RCTs, 357 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Topical cervical analgesia Topical 10 mL 2% lignocaine gel probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with aspiration compared to KY Jelly (MD -0.87, 95% CI -1.60 to -0.14; 1 RCT, 131 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). In participants who also received a PCB, 20 mg topical cervical lidocaine spray probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain during the procedure compared to two pumps of normal saline spray (median -1 point, IQR -2 to -1; P < 0.001; 1 RCT, 55 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Intravenous paracetamol 1000 mg compared to two pumps of cervical lidocaine spray probably does not results in a clinically meaningful difference in pain procedure (median 1 point, IQR -2 to 2; P < 0.001; 1 RCT, 48 participants; low-certainty evidence). Non-PCB local anaesthesia or PCB technique comparative effectiveness trials Depth of PCB The evidence suggests that a 3-cm deep PCB probably does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with aspiration compared to a 1.5-cm deep PCB (MD -1.00, 95% CI -1.09 to -0.91; 2 RCTs, 229 participants; low-certainty evidence). PCB: four sites versus two sites A two-site (4-8 o'clock) 20 mL 1% lidocaine PCB does not result in a clinically meaningful difference in pain with dilation compared to a four-site (2-4-8-10 o'clock) PCB (MD 8.60, 95% CI 0.69 to 16.51; 1 RCT, 163 participants; high-certainty evidence). Overall, participants reported moderately high satisfaction with pain control and studies reported few adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence from this updated review indicates that a 20 mL 1% plain lidocaine PCB decreases pain during an abortion procedure. Evidence supports forgoing buffering lidocaine and a wait time between PCB injection and cervical dilation. A 1.5-cm deep injection as opposed to a 3-cm deep injection is sufficient. A two-site PCB injection as opposed to a four-site injection has similar effectiveness. Topical cervical anaesthesia (10 mL 2% lignocaine gel or 20 mg topical cervical lidocaine spray) as compared to placebo did not decrease pain based on moderate-certainty evidence, but then when compared to PCB, pain control was similar. Due to this inconsistency in evidence regarding the effectiveness of topical anaesthesia, its routine use is presently not supported. This review did not include studies of pain management with conscious sedation but, based on the results of our prior Cochrane review and the 2022 WHO guidelines, we recommend that the option of combination of pain management using conscious sedation plus PCB and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs should be offered where conscious sedation is available as it further decreases pain.

Nonpharmacological pain management interventions in medical and surgical abortion: A scoping review

AIMS

The study aimed to present a broad overview of the research conducted and to synthesize evidence of the utility of nonpharmacological interventions for pain management in medical and surgical abortions.

BACKGROUND

High-quality care for medical and surgical abortion requires pain to be managed effectively. However, women reported low satisfaction with pain management in abortion care.

DESIGN

A scoping review design was employed.

DATA SOURCES

No date limit was set. PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ProQuest and Scopus were searched in April 2021.

REVIEW METHODS

Arksey and O'Malley's framework was used. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analysis extension-Scoping Reviews was followed.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included. The results revealed that support interventions, music therapy, acupoint stimulation and hypnotic analgesia were nonpharmacological interventions used to decrease abortion pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical nurses, nurse managers and policymakers should attach full importance to the pain management in abortion and may use the study findings to guide the pain management practice.

The Application of Hypnosis in Obstetrics

Hypnosis, the induction of a naturally relaxed state of mind and body, is most commonly practiced by pregnant women in preparation for the childbirth experience. A literature review was performed to assess the effects of hypnosis before, during and after pregnancy. The majority of data is extracted from case series and low-quality studies thereby limiting the acceptability of hypnosis for various pregnancy related conditions. A few well-designed studies show that self-hypnosis may be beneficial for mitigating labor pain and fear of childbirth. Women can safely pursue hypnotherapy during pregnancy; however, high quality trials are needed to demonstrate its complete efficacy.

Hypnosis and the Alleviation of Clinical Pain: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis

This is the first comprehensive meta-analysis in approximately 20 years of all controlled studies of the use of hypnosis for relieving clinical pain. To be included, studies were required to utilize a between-subjects or mixed model design in which a hypnosis intervention was compared with a control condition in alleviating any form of clinical pain. Of 523 records screened, 42 studies incorporating 45 trials of hypnosis met the inclusion criteria. Our most conservative estimates of the impact of hypnosis on pain yielded mean weighted effect sizes of 0.60 (p ≤ .001) for 40 post trials and 0.61 (p ≤ .001) for 9 follow-up trials. These effect sizes fall in the medium range according to Cohen's guideline and suggest the average participant receiving hypnosis reduced pain more than about 73% of control participants. Hypnosis was moderated by the overall methodological quality of trials-the mean weighted effect size of the 19 post trials without high risk ratings on any of the Cochrane Risk of Bias dimensions was 0.77 (p ≤ .001). Hypnosis was also moderated by hypnotic suggestibility, with 6 post trials producing a mean weighted effect size of r = 0.53 (p ≤ .001). Our findings strengthen the assertion that hypnosis is a very efficacious intervention for alleviating clinical pain.

No. 360-Induced Abortion: Surgical Abortion and Second Trimester Medical Methods

OBJECTIVE

This guideline reviews evidence relating to the provision of surgical induced abortion (IA) and second trimester medical abortion, including pre- and post-procedural care.

INTENDED USERS

Gynaecologists, family physicians, nurses, midwives, residents, and other health care providers who currently or intend to provide and/or teach IAs.

TARGET POPULATION

Women with an unintended or abnormal first or second trimester pregnancy.

EVIDENCE

PubMed, Medline, and the Cochrane Database were searched using the key words: first-trimester surgical abortion, second-trimester surgical abortion, second-trimester medical abortion, dilation and evacuation, induction abortion, feticide, cervical preparation, cervical dilation, abortion complications. Results were restricted to English or French systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, clinical trials, and observational studies published from 1979 to July 2017. National and international clinical practice guidelines were consulted for review. Grey literature was not searched.

VALUES

The quality of evidence in this document was rated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology framework. The summary of findings is available upon request.

BENEFITS, HARMS, AND/OR COSTS

IA is safe and effective. The benefits of IA outweigh the potential harms or costs. No new direct harms or costs identified with these guidelines.

The effectiveness of hypnotic analgesia in the management of procedural pain in minimally invasive procedures: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures under a light conscious sedation perceive pain and anxiety. Hypnosis used together with analgesics has been investigated in numerous studies.

AIMS AND METHODS

To assess the effectiveness of hypnotic analgesia in management of pain, anxiety, analgesic consumption, procedure length and adverse events in adults undergoing minimally invasive procedures. Clinical controlled trials in which hypnosis was used together with pharmacological analgesia compared to pharmacological analgesia alone during invasive procedures were included. Seven databases were searched. The methodological quality of the studies was assessed by two reviewers using a standardised instrument for critical appraisal from Joanna Briggs Institute, 'Meta-Analysis of statistics assessment and review Instrument'. Meta-analyses using the review manager version 5.3 software were conducted on procedure length and adverse events. Results for pain, anxiety and analgesics were synthesised in narrative summaries. Conduction of the review adheres to the PRISMA checklist.

RESULTS

Ten studies comprising 1,365 participants were included. A reduction in the consumption of pain medication was found between 21%-86% without aggravating pain intensity and anxiety. In few studies, significant reduction in pain intensity and anxiety was found. Meta-analysis including seven studies revealed a small beneficial effect on reducing procedure length. A meta-analysis on adverse events showed no significant reduction. Statistical heterogeneity was found among the studies included.

CONCLUSION

For patients undergoing invasive procedures, hypnotic analgesia was effective in reducing consumption of analgesics. Only a slight effect was, however, found on experienced anxiety and pain intensity. It did not prolong the procedure and was safe to provide.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Hypnosis is recommended as pain management for adults during invasive procedures. A reduced consumption of pain medication potentially has a major impact on monitoring and observation of patients following the procedure, thus improving patient safety and reducing resource consumption.

A prospective study of the frequency of severe pain and predictive factors in women undergoing first-trimester surgical abortion under local anaesthesia

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency of severe pain among women and to identify the associated predictive factors during first-trimester surgical abortion under local anaesthesia (LA).

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective cohort study from November 2013 to January 2014 at the Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Rennes, France. The study population was composed of one hundred and ninety-four patients who underwent an elective first-trimester surgical abortion under LA. In an anonymized questionnaire, the participants were asked to self-record their perceived pain level 30 min after the completion of the procedure using a 10 cm visual analogue scale (VAS). The main outcome measure was the frequency of severe pain among women, defined as VAS ≥ 7. Secondary outcome measure was the risk factor(s) for severe pain.

RESULTS

Severe pain (i.e. VAS ≥ 7) was experienced by 46% (95% CI: 39%-53%) of the population. Multivariate analysis confirmed that >10 weeks of gestation (OR: 2.530 [95% CI: 1.1-5.81], p = .0287) and having 0 or 1 child (OR: 5.206 [95% CI: 1.87-14.49], p = .0016) were significant independent factors of severe pain.

CONCLUSION

Nearly half of the women experienced severe pain. More than 10 weeks of gestation and parity were predictive factors of severe pain. These findings should be useful in counselling women undergoing surgical abortion under LA.

Hypnoanalgesia for Dilatation and Curettage Pain Control

There are many acceptable approaches ranging from light to moderate intravenous sedation or analgesic drugs that are used to provide pain control in dilatation and curettage. We report the use of hypnosis as a nonpharmacologic approach to control pain in this manner.

Hypnosis for Acute Procedural Pain: A Critical Review

Clinical evidence for the effectiveness of hypnosis in the treatment of acute procedural pain was critically evaluated based on reports from randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). Results from the 29 RCTs meeting inclusion criteria suggest that hypnosis decreases pain compared to standard care and attention control groups and that it is at least as effective as comparable adjunct psychological or behavioral therapies. In addition, applying hypnosis in multiple sessions prior to the day of the procedure produced the highest percentage of significant results. Hypnosis was most effective in minor surgical procedures. However, interpretations are limited by considerable risk of bias. Further studies using minimally effective control conditions and systematic control of intervention dose and timing are required to strengthen conclusions.

The effectiveness of suggestive techniques in reducing postoperative side effects: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Suggestive interventions such as hypnosis and therapeutic suggestions are frequently used to alleviate surgical side effects; however, the effectiveness of therapeutic suggestion intervention has not yet been systematically evaluated. In the present study, we tested the hypotheses that (1) suggestive interventions are useful for reducing postoperative side effects; (2) therapeutic suggestions are comparable in effectiveness to hypnosis; (3) live presentation is more effective than recordings; and (4) suggestive interventions would be equally effective used in minor and major surgeries.

METHODS

We performed random effect meta-analysis with meta-regression and sensitivity analysis by moderating factors on a pool of 26 studies meeting the inclusion criteria (N = 1890). Outcome variables were postoperative anxiety, pain intensity, pain medication requirement, and nausea.

RESULTS

Suggestive interventions reduced postoperative anxiety (g = 0.40; 99% confidence interval [CI] = 0.13-0.66; P < 0.001) and pain intensity (g = 0.25; 99% CI = 0.00-0.50; P = 0.010), but did not significantly affect postoperative analgesic drug consumption (g = 0.16; 99% CI = -0.16 to 0.47; P = 0.202) and nausea (g = 0.38; 99% CI = -0.06 to 0.81; P = 0.026). No significant differences were found for intervention type, presentation method, and severity of surgery; however, sensitivity analysis only supported the effectiveness of hypnosis (g = 0.62; 99% CI = 0.31-0.92; P < 0.001) and live presentation (g = 0.55; 99% CI = 0.23-0.88; P < 0.001) for decreasing postoperative anxiety, and that of live presentation for alleviating postoperative pain (g = 0.44; 99% CI = 0.07-0.82; P = 0.002). Sensitivity analyses also suggested that suggestive interventions are only effective for decreasing pain intensity during minor surgical procedures (g = 0.39; 99% CI = 0.00-0.78; P = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

Suggestive techniques might be useful tools to alleviate postoperative anxiety and pain; however, strength of the evidence is weak because of possible bias in the reviewed articles. The lack of access to within-subjects data and the overlap between moderator conditions also limit the scope of the analysis. More methodologically correct studies are required with sensitivity to moderating factors and to within-subjects changes. For clinical purposes, we advise the use of hypnosis with live presentation to reduce postoperative anxiety and pain, until convincing evidence is uncovered for the effectiveness of therapeutic suggestions and recorded presentation. Pain management with adjunct suggestive interventions is mostly encouraged in minor rather than major surgeries.

Vocal local versus pharmacological treatments for pain management in tubal ligation procedures in rural Kenya: a non-inferiority trial

Background

Vocal local (VL) is a non-pharmacological pain management technique for gynecological procedures. In Africa, it is usually used in combination with pharmacological analgesics. However, analgesics are associated with side-effects, and can be costly and subject to frequent stock-outs, particularly in remote rural settings. We compared the effectiveness of VL + local anesthesia + analgesics (the standard approach), versus VL + local anesthesia without analgesics, on pain and satisfaction levels for women undergoing tubal ligations in rural Kenya.

Methods

We conducted a site-randomised non-inferiority trial of 884 women receiving TLs from 40 Marie Stopes mobile outreach sites in Kisii and Machakos Districts. Twenty sites provided VL + local anesthesia + analgesics (control), while 20 offered VL + local anesthesia without additional analgesics (intervention). Pain was measured using a validated 11-point Numeric Rating Scale; satisfaction was measured using 11-point scales.

Results

A total of 461 women underwent tubal ligations with VL + local anesthesia, while 423 received tubal ligations with VL + local anesthesia + analgesics. The majority were aged ≥30 years (78%), and had >3 children (99%). In a multivariate analysis, pain during the procedure was not significantly different between the two groups. The pain score after the procedure was significantly lower in the intervention group versus the control group (by 0.40 points; p = 0.041). Satisfaction scores were equally high in both groups; 96% would recommend the procedure to a friend.

Conclusion

VL + local anesthesia is as effective as VL + local anesthesia + analgesics for pain management during tubal ligation in rural Kenya. Avoiding analgesics is associated with numerous benefits including cost savings and fewer issues related to the maintenance, procurement and monitoring of restricted opioid drugs, particularly in remote low-resource settings where these systems are weak.

Trial registration

Pan-African Clinical Trials Registry PACTR201304000495942.

The special programme of research in human reproduction: forty years of activities to achieve reproductive health for all

The Special Programme of Research in Human Reproduction (HRP), co-sponsored by the UNDP, UNFPA, WHO, and the World Bank, is celebrating 40 years of activities with an expansion of its mandate and new co-sponsors. When it began, in 1972, the main focus was on evaluating the acceptability, effectiveness, and safety of existing fertility-regulating methods, as well as developing new, improved modalities for family planning. In 1994, HRP not only made major contributions to the Plan of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD); it also broadened its scope of work to include other aspects of health dealing with sexuality and reproduction, adding a specific perspective on gender issues and human rights. In 2002, HRP's mandate was once again broadened to include sexually transmitted infections and HIV/AIDS and in 2003 it was further expanded to research activities on preventing violence against women and its many dire health consequences. Today, the work of the Programme includes research on: the sexual and reproductive health of adolescents, women, and men; maternal and perinatal health; reproductive tract and sexually transmitted infections (including HIV/AIDS); family planning; infertility; unsafe abortion; sexual health; screening for cancer of the cervix in developing countries, and gender and reproductive rights. Additional activities by the Programme have included: fostering international cooperation in the field of human reproduction; the elaboration of WHO's first Global Reproductive Health Strategy; work leading to the inclusion of ICPD's goal 'reproductive health for all by 2015' into the Millennium Development Goal framework; the promotion of critical interagency statements on the public health, legal, and human rights implications of female genital mutilation and gender-biased sex selection. Finally, HRP has been involved in the creation of guidelines and tools, such as the 'Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use', the 'Global handbook for family planning providers', the 'Definition of core competencies in primary health care', and designing tools for operationalizing a human rights approach to sexual and reproductive health programmes.

Do standards for the design and reporting of nonpharmacological trials facilitate hypnotherapy studies?

The design and quality of 30 recent hypnotherapy trials (years 2000-2008) were assessed using the checklist for evaluating a report of nonpharmacological treatment (CLEAR NPT). Randomization was adequately reported in 53% of studies. The masking of participants and care providers is not feasible in hypnotherapy studies. Assessor masking is rarely introduced in randomized, controlled trials (27%). Reporting and quality of published hypnotherapy trials need to be improved. Investigators may consider using CLEAR NPT to evaluate study quality but attention should be paid to document intervention adherence, standardization of cointerventions, participant and care-provider expectations and beliefs, and, finally, hypnotizability.

Hypnotizability and opinions about hypnosis in a clinical trial for the hypnotic control of pain and anxiety during pregnancy termination

This descriptive study evaluates the hypnoanalgesic experience's effect on participants' hypnotizability and opinions about hypnosis and identifies factors associated with hypnotizability. Hypnotizability was assessed using the Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scale: Form A in 290 women 1 month after their participation in a randomized clinical trial evaluating hypnotic intervention for pain/anxiety versus standard care during pregnancy termination. Opinions were collected before and after the intervention. The regression model describing hypnotizability (F = 13.55; p < .0001; R(2) = 0.20) retained 5 variables but not the intervention group. The variable explaining most of total variance (62.9%) was the level of perceived automaticity/involuntariness. Opinions about hypnosis were modified by the hypnotic experience compared to standard care but were not associated with hypnotizability. Exposure to hypnoanalgesia did not influence hypnotizability but modifies significantly the opinions about hypnosis. Consistent with previous findings, perceived automaticity appears to best predict hypnotizability.

Pain control in first trimester surgical abortion

BACKGROUND

First trimester abortions especially cervical dilation and suction aspiration are associated with pain, despite various methods of pain control.

OBJECTIVES

Compare different methods of pain control during first trimester surgical abortion.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched multiple electronic databases with the appropriate key words, as well as reference lists of articles, and contacted professionals to seek other trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials comparing methods of pain control in first trimester surgical abortion at less than 14 weeks gestational age using electric or manual suction aspiration. Outcomes included intra- and postoperative pain, side effects, recovery measures and satisfaction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently extracted data. Meta-analysis results are expressed as weighted mean difference (WMD) or Peto Odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included forty studies with 5131 participants. Due to heterogeneity we divided studies into 7 groups:Local anesthesia: Data was insufficient to show a clear benefit of a paracervical block (PCB) compared to no PCB or a PCB with bacteriostatic saline. Pain scores during dilation and aspiration were improved with deep injection (WMD -1.64 95% CI -3.21 to -0.08; WMD 1.00 95% CI 1.09 to 0.91), and with adding a 4% intrauterine lidocaine infusion (WMD -2.0 95% CI -3.29 to -0.71, WMD -2.8 95% CI -3.95 to -1.65 with dilation and aspiration respectively).PCB with premedication: Ibuprofen and naproxen resulted in small reduction of intra- and post-operative pain.Analgesia: Diclofenac-sodium did not reduce pain.Conscious sedation: The addition of conscious intravenous sedation using diazepam and fentanyl to PCB decreased procedural pain.General anesthesia (GA): Conscious sedation increased intraoperative but decreased postoperative pain compared to GA (Peto OR 14.77 95% CI 4.91 to 44.38, and Peto OR 7.47 95% CI 2.2 to 25.36 for dilation and aspiration respectively, and WMD 1.00 95% CI 1.77 to 0.23 postoperatively). Inhalation anesthetics are associated with increased blood loss (p<0.001).GA with premedication: The COX 2 inhibitor etoricoxib, the non-selective COX inhibitors lornoxicam, diclofenac and ketorolac IM, and the opioid nalbuphine were improved postoperative pain.Non-pharmacological intervention: Listening to music decreased procedural pain.No major complication was observed.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Conscious sedation, GA and some non-pharmacological interventions decreased procedural and postoperative pain, while being safe and satisfactory to patients. Data on the widely used PCB is inadequate to support its use, and it needs to be further studied to determine any benefit.

THE EFFICACY OF HYPNOTIC ANALGESIA IN ADULTS: A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

This article both summarizes the previous reviews of randomized, controlled trials of hypnotic analgesia for the treatment of chronic and acute pain in adults, and reviews similar trials which have recently been published in the scientific literature. The results indicate that for both chronic and acute pain conditions: (1) hypnotic analgesia consistently results in greater decreases in a variety of pain outcomes compared to no treatment/standard care; (2) hypnosis frequently out-performs non-hypnotic interventions (e.g. education, supportive therapy) in terms of reductions in pain-related outcomes; and (3) hypnosis performs similarly to treatments that contain hypnotic elements (such as progressive muscle relaxation), but is not surpassed in efficacy by these alternative treatments. Factors that may influence the efficacy of hypnotic analgesia interventions are discussed, including, but not limited to, the patient's level of suggestibility, treatment outcome expectancy, and provider expertise. Based upon this body of literature, suggestions are offered for practitioners who are using, or would like to use, hypnosis for the amelioration of pain problems in their patients or clients.

Hypnotic analgesia intervention during first-trimester pregnancy termination: an open randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether hypnotic analgesia can reduce the need for intravenous sedation analgesia without increasing pain and anxiety levels during abortion.

STUDY DESIGN

A cohort of 350 women who were scheduled for surgical abortion (< 14 weeks' gestation) were assigned randomly to a standard care group or a group that received a standardized hypnotic analgesia intervention 20 minutes before and throughout the surgical procedure. Primary outcome was the difference between the 2 groups: (1) the proportion who received sedation (yes/no) during the surgical procedure and (2) self-assessments of pain and anxiety during suction evacuation of uterus content.

RESULTS

Women who underwent hypnosis required less intravenous sedation analgesia (108/172 women; 63%) than the control group (149/175 women; 85%; P < .0001) and self-reported no difference in pain, but not in anxiety, levels during suction evacuation.

CONCLUSION

Hypnotic interventions can be effective as an adjunct to pharmacologic management of acute pain during abortion.

HYPNOSIS TO MANAGE DISTRESS RELATED TO MEDICAL PROCEDURES: A META-ANALYSIS

This meta-analysis evaluates the effect of hypnosis in reducing emotional distress associated with medical procedures. PsycINFO and PubMed were searched from their inception through February 2008. Randomized controlled trials of hypnosis interventions, administered in the context of clinical medical procedures, with a distress outcome, were included in the meta-analysis (26 of 61 papers initially reviewed). Information on sample size, study methodology, participant age and outcomes were abstracted independently by 2 authors using a standardized form. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. Effects from the 26 trials were based on 2342 participants. Results indicated an overall large effect size (ES) of 0.88 (95% CI = 0.57-1.19) in favour of hypnosis. Effect sizes differed significantly (p < 0.01) according to age (children benefitted to a greater extent than adults) and method of hypnosis delivery, but did not differ based on the control condition used (standard care vs. attention control).

Hypnotic induction and therapeutic suggestions in first-trimester pregnancy termination

Several papers of interest for researchers and clinicians have recently appeared in scientific medical literature evaluating hypnosis' efficacy in managing patients' distress and pain during surgical procedures. In this article, following a pilot study, the authors describe the context and standardized induction procedures that they are using in an ongoing clinical trial evaluating the effect of hypnosis on acute pain and anxiety during termination of pregnancy.