Clinical hypnosis for procedural pain and distress in children: A scoping review

Dali Geagea¹, Zephanie Tyack¹, Roy Kimble¹, Vince Polito³, Bassel Ayoub⁴, Devin B. Terhune⁵, Bronwyn Griffin⁶,
¹University of Queensland, Centre for Children’s Burns and Trauma Research, South Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
²Australian Centre for Health Service Innovation and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
³School of Psychological Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
⁴Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
⁵Department of Psychology, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King’s College London, London, London, UK
⁶School of Nursing and Midwifery, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD, Australia

Abstract

Background and aims
Clinical hypnosis is supported by evidence of effectiveness for children’s procedural pain and distress. However, systematic reviews of hypnosis for children’s procedural pain and distress focus on oncology and needle procedures and lack in other paediatric contexts. To address this gap, this scoping review maps the evidence of clinical hypnosis for children’s procedural pain and distress across a broad range of paediatric contexts.
Methods
Various databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, and Web of Science) and grey literature were searched before hand-searching references and key journals (up to May 2022). Included articles involved clinical hypnosis interventions, comprising an induction followed by therapeutic suggestions, for children’s procedural pain and distress.
Results
After screening 4,775 articles, the review included 38 eligible studies involving 2,205 children. Most studies (76%) reported moderate to large effect sizes in favour of clinical hypnosis compared to control conditions and nonpharmacological interventions. However, the evidence was limited by inadequate reporting of interventions and lack of fidelity measures. There were also gaps in knowledge about the safety of clinical hypnosis and factors that influence outcomes. The review also identified diverse interventions, contexts, study designs, and populations across the included studies, which limits the generalizability of the findings.
Conclusion
This review highlights the need to explore the feasibility, acceptability, implementation, and safety of clinical hypnosis in children undergoing painful procedures. It urges researchers to follow recommended research guidelines, assess the fidelity of intervention delivery, and adequately report interventions to promote replicating and comparing interventions. The review also pinpoints common methodological shortcomings of trials to avoid, such as small sample sizes and inadequate reporting of control conditions and pain unpleasantness outcomes. Further, the review suggests potential benefits of clinical hypnosis for children’s procedural pain and distress, which provides a precursor for further systematic reviews and trials.

Biography

Doctor in Pharmacy Practice, Hypnotherapist, Hypno-anaesthesiologist, Specialist in Clinical Research in Neurosciences, NLP Practitioner ; Member of the National Guild of Hypnotherapists.