• Vilfredo De Pascalis, Immacolata Cacace, and Francesca Massicolle.
• University of Rome "La sapienza", Department of Psychology, Via dei Marsi 78, 00185 Rome, Italy. v.depascalis@caspur.it
• Pain. 2008 Jan 1;134(1-2):197-208.

AbstractSomatosensory event-related potentials (SERPs) to painful electric standard stimuli under an odd-ball paradigm were analyzed in 12 high hypnotizable (HH), 12 medium hypnotizable (MH), and 12 low hypnotizable (LH) subjects during waking, hypnosis, and a cued eyes-open posthypnotic condition. In each of these conditions subjects were suggested to produce an obstructive imagery of stimulus perception as a treatment for pain reduction. A No-Analgesia treatment served as a control in waking and hypnosis conditions. The subjects were required to count the number of delivered target stimuli. HH subjects experienced significant pain and distress reductions during posthypnotic analgesia as compared to hypnotic analgesia and between these two analgesic conditions as compared to the two control conditions. Outside of hypnosis, these subjects remembered less pain and distress levels than they reported during hypnotic and posthypnotic analgesia treatments. In contrast, for waking-analgesia treatment, HH subjects remembered similar pain and distress levels to those they reported concurrently with the stimulation. HH subjects, during hypnotic and posthypnotic analgesia treatments, detected a smaller number of target stimuli and displayed a significant amplitude reduction of the midline frontal and central N140 and P200 SERP components. No significant SERP differences were observed for these subjects between treatments in waking condition and between hypnotic and posthypnotic analgesic treatments. For the MH and LH subjects no significant N140 and P200 amplitude changes were observed among analgesic conditions as compared to control conditions. These amplitude findings are seen as indicating that hypnotic analgesia can affect earlier and later stages of stimulus processing.

21 keywords...

hide…