Article

A randomized clinical trail of a brief hypnosis intervention to control side effects in breast surgery patients

Department of Health Policy and Management, Columbia University, New York, New York, United States
CancerSpectrum Knowledge Environment (Impact Factor: 15.16). 10/2007; 99(17):1304-12. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djm106
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Breast cancer surgery is associated with side effects, including postsurgical pain, nausea, and fatigue. We carried out a randomized clinical trial to test the hypotheses that a brief presurgery hypnosis intervention would decrease intraoperative anesthesia and analgesic use and side effects associated with breast cancer surgery and that it would be cost effective.
We randomly assigned 200 patients who were scheduled to undergo excisional breast biopsy or lumpectomy (mean age 48.5 years) to a 15-minute presurgery hypnosis session conducted by a psychologist or nondirective empathic listening (attention control). Patients were not blinded to group assignment. Intraoperative anesthesia use (i.e., of the analgesics lidocaine and fentanyl and the sedatives propofol and midazolam) was assessed. Patient-reported pain and other side effects as measured on a visual analog scale (0-100) were assessed at discharge, as was use of analgesics in the recovery room. Institutional costs and time in the operating room were assessed via chart review.
Patients in the hypnosis group required less propofol (means = 64.01 versus 96.64 microg; difference = 32.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.95 to 61.30) and lidocaine (means = 24.23 versus 31.09 mL; difference = 6.86; 95% CI = 3.05 to 10.68) than patients in the control group. Patients in the hypnosis group also reported less pain intensity (means = 22.43 versus 47.83; difference = 25.40; 95% CI = 17.56 to 33.25), pain unpleasantness (means = 21.19 versus 39.05; difference = 17.86; 95% CI = 9.92 to 25.80), nausea (means = 6.57 versus 25.49; difference = 18.92; 95% CI = 12.98 to 24.87), fatigue (means = 29.47 versus 54.20; difference = 24.73; 95% CI = 16.64 to 32.83), discomfort (means = 23.01 versus 43.20; difference = 20.19; 95% CI = 12.36 to 28.02), and emotional upset (means = 8.67 versus 33.46; difference = 24.79; 95% CI = 18.56 to 31.03). No statistically significant differences were seen in the use of fentanyl, midazolam, or recovery room analgesics. Institutional costs for surgical breast cancer procedures were $8561 per patient at Mount Sinai School of Medicine. Patients in the hypnosis group cost the institution $772.71 less per patient than those in the control group (95% CI = 75.10 to 1469.89), mainly due to reduced surgical time.
Hypnosis was superior to attention control regarding propofol and lidocaine use; pain, nausea, fatigue, discomfort, and emotional upset at discharge; and institutional cost. Overall, the present data support the use of hypnosis with breast cancer surgery patients.

Full-text

Available from: Donald D Price, Mar 27, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
114 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cancer-related fatigue is a common yet underappreciated problem with a significant impact on functional ability and quality of life. Practice guidelines mandate that all cancer patients and survivors be screened for cancer-related fatigue (CRF) at regular intervals. Comorbidities that could contribute to fatigue should be treated, and patients with moderate to severe fatigue should undergo a comprehensive evaluation. Nonpharmacologic interventions are important tools to combat CRF and should be incorporated into routine practice. Physical activity, educational interventions, and cognitive-behavioral therapy have the most supportive data and can be recommended to patients with confidence. From a practical standpoint, general education on CRF is something that most care providers can readily offer patients as part of routine care. Other interventions that appear promising but are as yet lacking convincing evidence include mindfulness-based stress reduction, yoga, and acupuncture. Reiki, Qigong, hypnosis, and music therapy may be worthy of further investigation.
    The Cancer Journal 09/2014; 20(5):313-318. DOI:10.1097/PPO.0000000000000064 · 3.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The majority of breast cancer patients use complementary and/or integrative therapies during and beyond cancer treatment to manage symptoms, prevent toxicities, and improve quality of life. Practice guidelines are needed to inform clinicians and patients about safe and effective therapies. Following the Institute of Medicine's guideline development process, a systematic review identified randomized controlled trials testing the use of integrative therapies for supportive care in patients receiving breast cancer treatment. Trials were included if the majority of participants had breast cancer and/or breast cancer patient results were reported separately, and outcomes were clinically relevant. Recommendations were organized by outcome and graded based upon a modified version of the US Preventive Services Task Force grading system. The search (January 1, 1990-December 31, 2013) identified 4900 articles, of which 203 were eligible for analysis. Meditation, yoga, and relaxation with imagery are recommended for routine use for common conditions, including anxiety and mood disorders (Grade A). Stress management, yoga, massage, music therapy, energy conservation, and meditation are recommended for stress reduction, anxiety, depression, fatigue, and quality of life (Grade B). Many interventions (n = 32) had weaker evidence of benefit (Grade C). Some interventions (n = 7) were deemed unlikely to provide any benefit (Grade D). Notably, only one intervention, acetyl-l-carnitine for the prevention of taxane-induced neuropathy, was identified as likely harmful (Grade H) as it was found to increase neuropathy. The majority of intervention/modality combinations (n = 138) did not have sufficient evidence to form specific recommendations (Grade I). Specific integrative therapies can be recommended as evidence-based supportive care options during breast cancer treatment. Most integrative therapies require further investigation via well-designed controlled trials with meaningful outcomes. © The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Cancer-related fatigue (CRF) has deleterious effects on physical, social, cognitive, and vocational functioning, and causes emotional and spiritual distress for patients and their families; however, it remains under-recognized and undertreated. This article critically reviews and integrates the available empirical evidence supporting the efficacy of pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment approaches to CRF, highlighting new evidence since 2007 and 2009 Putting Evidence Into Practice publications. Interventions that are recommended for practice or likely to be effective in improving fatigue outcomes include exercise; screening for treatable risk factors; management of concurrent symptoms; yoga; structured rehabilitation; Wisconsin ginseng; cognitive-behavioral therapies for insomnia, pain, and depression; mindfulness-based stress reduction; and psychoeducational interventions such as anticipatory guidance, psychosocial support, and energy conservation and activity management. This information can be applied to improve the management of CRF, inform health policy and program development, shape the design of clinical trials of new therapies for CRF, and drive basic and translational research.
    Clinical journal of oncology nursing 12/2014; 18:38-58. DOI:10.1188/14.CJON.S3.38-58 · 0.95 Impact Factor