Dali Geagea , David Ogez , Roy Kimble , Zephanie Tyack
{"title":"Redefining hypnosis: A narrative review of theories to move towards an integrative model","authors":"Dali Geagea , David Ogez , Roy Kimble , Zephanie Tyack","doi":"10.1016/j.ctcp.2023.101826","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Hypnosis is an ancient mind-body intervention that has regained interest with the surge of research in the last decade documenting its clinical validity. Yet, theoretical controversies and misconceptions prevail among theorists, clinicians, and the general public, impeding the understanding, acceptance, replication, and use of hypnosis. Providing adequate information, which dispels misconceptions and promotes more balanced views, is warranted to facilitate the implementation and adoption of hypnosis in clinical and research settings. This review re-examines the conceptualisation of hypnosis throughout history and the theoretical controversies surrounding it while highlighting their meeting points and clinical implications. Despite dichotomies, a broad agreement appears across theoretical approaches regarding hypnotic analgesia effects, key components, and vocabulary. Further, theories highlight key factors of hypnotic responding. For instance, social theories highlight social and contextual variables, whereas state theories highlight biopsychosocial mechanisms and individual factors. Based on theories, the terms <em>hypnotherapy</em> or <em>clinical hypnosis</em> are recommended to refer to the therapeutic use of hypnosis in psychotherapeutic and medical contexts, respectively. This review concludes with a model that integrates various theories and evidence and presents hypnosis as a complex multifaceted intervention encompassing multiple procedures, phenomena, and influencing factors. This review intends to deepen our understanding of hypnosis, and promote its more rapid adoption and adequate implementation in research and clinical contexts, in addition to steering research towards evidence-based hypnotic practice. The review can have important research and clinical implications by contributing to advancing knowledge regarding hypnotic procedures, phenomena, and influencing factors.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48752,"journal":{"name":"Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice","volume":"54 ","pages":"Article 101826"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S174438812300107X/pdfft?md5=3da163d99868fbb9f113a2bca7ee3677&pid=1-s2.0-S174438812300107X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S174438812300107X","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTEGRATIVE & COMPLEMENTARY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Hypnosis is an ancient mind-body intervention that has regained interest with the surge of research in the last decade documenting its clinical validity. Yet, theoretical controversies and misconceptions prevail among theorists, clinicians, and the general public, impeding the understanding, acceptance, replication, and use of hypnosis. Providing adequate information, which dispels misconceptions and promotes more balanced views, is warranted to facilitate the implementation and adoption of hypnosis in clinical and research settings. This review re-examines the conceptualisation of hypnosis throughout history and the theoretical controversies surrounding it while highlighting their meeting points and clinical implications. Despite dichotomies, a broad agreement appears across theoretical approaches regarding hypnotic analgesia effects, key components, and vocabulary. Further, theories highlight key factors of hypnotic responding. For instance, social theories highlight social and contextual variables, whereas state theories highlight biopsychosocial mechanisms and individual factors. Based on theories, the terms hypnotherapy or clinical hypnosis are recommended to refer to the therapeutic use of hypnosis in psychotherapeutic and medical contexts, respectively. This review concludes with a model that integrates various theories and evidence and presents hypnosis as a complex multifaceted intervention encompassing multiple procedures, phenomena, and influencing factors. This review intends to deepen our understanding of hypnosis, and promote its more rapid adoption and adequate implementation in research and clinical contexts, in addition to steering research towards evidence-based hypnotic practice. The review can have important research and clinical implications by contributing to advancing knowledge regarding hypnotic procedures, phenomena, and influencing factors.
期刊介绍:
Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice is an internationally refereed journal published to meet the broad ranging needs of the healthcare profession in the effective and professional integration of complementary therapies within clinical practice.
Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice aims to provide rigorous peer reviewed papers addressing research, implementation of complementary therapies (CTs) in the clinical setting, legal and ethical concerns, evaluative accounts of therapy in practice, philosophical analysis of emergent social trends in CTs, excellence in clinical judgement, best practice, problem management, therapy information, policy development and management of change in order to promote safe and efficacious clinical practice.
Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice welcomes and considers accounts of reflective practice.