• Aurélien Bataille, Sébastien Besset, Barbara Szekely, Mireille Michel-Cherqui, Virginie Dumans, Ngai Liu, Thierry Chazot, Marc Fischler, and Morgan Le Guen.
• aDepartment of Anesthesia, Burn and Critical Care, University Hospitals Saint Louis Lariboisière, Paris, France and University Paris Diderot, Paris bDepartment of Anesthesia, Foch Hospital, Suresnes, France and University Versailles Saint-Quentin en Yvelines, France.
• Medicine (Baltimore). 2017 May 1; 96 (19): e6389.

ObjectiveThe automated administration of propofol in a closed loop could be used to objectively evaluate the nonpharmacological anesthetic action of hypnotherapy. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of a conversational hypnosis session on the consumption of propofol for anesthetic induction.DesignA randomized, usual care-controlled, single-center, patient-blind trial.SettingTertiary care center in France from November 2012 to December 2013.ParticipantsAdult patients scheduled for a surgical procedure under general anesthesia.InterventionsBefore surgery, patients were randomized with a computer-generated random list for a preoperative conversational hypnosis session or for usual care. The conversational hypnosis session was conducted and individualized by the therapist with an academic degree in hypnosis in a quiet environment. Anesthetic induction was automatically performed by propofol without opioids and was assisted by the bispectral index in a closed loop.OutcomePrimary endpoint was the propofol dose required for anesthesia induction, defined as a Bispectral index less than 60 for at least 30 seconds.ResultsThe study included 48 patients in the hypnosis group and 49 patients in the control group. No difference in propofol consumption to obtain anesthesia induction was observed between the groups (total dose: 138.6 [67.5] and 130 [47.9] mg, P = .47; adjusted dose: 2.15 [1.09] and 1.95 [0.66] mg/kg, P = .28, for the hypnosis and control groups, respectively). Hetero-evaluation of arm movement during propofol injection (no reaction: 98% and 74%; P = .004, in the hypnosis and control groups, respectively) and face reaction at venous access placement (no reaction 59% and 30%; P = .017, in the hypnosis and control groups, respectively) were lower in the hypnosis group. No adverse event was reported.ConclusionsNo difference in propofol consumption was observed in this study designed to evaluate the effect of a hypnotic conversational session on anesthesia induction using an automated tool for propofol administration.

28 keywords...

hide…