Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39263007›Full record

ReviewPain reports2024

Adjunctive use of hypnosis for clinical pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hannah G Jones, Rodrigo R N Rizzo, Brian W Pulling, Felicity A Braithwaite, Ashley R Grant, James H McAuley, Mark P Jensen, G Lorimer Moseley, Amy Rees, Tasha R Stanton

Registry-linked trialAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Pain reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07424209 (The Effectiveness of Hypnotic Communication in Reducing Emotional Distress and Improving Patient Experience During Elective Coronary Angiography), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07424209 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

The Effectiveness of Hypnotic Communication in Reducing Emotional Distress and Improving Patient Experience During Elective Coronary Angiography: A Monocentric Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversità degli Studi del Piemonte Orientale Amedeo AvogadroRan2025 to 2027Enrolled306ConditionsPsychological Distress, Pain, AnxietyArmsHypnotic Communication
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Hannah G JonesIIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Rodrigo R N RizzoCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Brian W PullingIIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9097-0374
Felicity A BraithwaiteIIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6676-026X
Ashley R GrantIIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
James H McAuleyCentre for Pain IMPACT, Neuroscience Research Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0550-828X
Mark P JensenDepartment of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
G Lorimer MoseleyIIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Amy ReesIIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Tasha R StantonIIMPACT in Health, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7106-4456

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

Acute painAdjunctChronic painHypnosisProcedural painSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID39263007
PMCPMC11390056

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.