SynthesisAnaesthesia2026
Hypnosis for anaesthetists: a systematic review and meta-analyses.
Synthesis in Anaesthesia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Hypnosis associated with local anesthesia versus local anesthesia alone during bone marrow biopsy: a randomized, controlled, multicenter study, QUALHYBOM.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTherapeutic hypnosis appears to offer psychological and physiological benefits in various medical fields, but despite increasing interest, its value for anaesthesia remains inconclusive.
methodsWe searched for studies of any design in which hypnosis was used for any intervention requiring the presence of an anaesthetist, alone or in combination with any type of anaesthesia, on children and adults. Meta-analyses using random-effects models were stratified on hypnosis timing, when three or more randomised controlled trials reported on a similar outcome. Additional analyses were performed adding data derived from non-randomised controlled studies. The primary outcome was the use of hypnotics and opioids during the intervention. Secondary outcomes included all outcomes related to pain, anxiety or adverse events.
resultsWe identified 142 studies that included 9238 patients (8319 adults, 919 children). Pre-intervention hypnosis decreased post-intervention visual analogue scale pain score (mean difference -0.88 cm, 95%CI -1.72 to -0.05) and anxiety (standardised mean difference -0.76, 95%CI -1.14 to -0.38). Per-intervention hypnosis decreased visual analogue scale pain intensity during the intervention (mean difference -1.14 cm, 95%CI -1.86 to -0.41) without impacting on post-intervention pain; decreased post-intervention anxiety (standardised mean difference -0.44, 95%CI -0.75 to -0.13); and lowered the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (risk ratio 0.43, 95%CI 0.25-0.74). Adding non-randomised controlled studies did not alter these results substantially. Evidence of the impact of pre- or per-intervention hypnosis on other outcomes, or of post-intervention hypnosis on any outcome, was lacking. DISCUSSION: Hypnosis may help reduce anxiety, alleviate pain during and after a procedure and lower the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. However, despite the inclusion of more than 9000 patients in studies examining the use of hypnosis for anaesthesia, its impact on most outcomes remains unknown.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.