MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392593200 · doi:10.3389/fpain.2024.1354015

Effects of perioperative clinical hypnosis on heart rate variability in patients undergoing oncologic surgery: secondary outcomes of a randomized controlled trial

2024· article· en· W4392593200 on OpenAlexafffund
Muhammad Abid Azam, Aliza Weinrib, P. Maxwell Slepian, Brittany N. Rosenbloom, Anna Waisman, Hance Clarke, Joel Katz

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pain Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPain Management and Placebo Effect
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoToronto General HospitalSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenYork University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoWomen's College HospitalYork University
KeywordsMedicinePerioperativeRandomized controlled trialHeart rate variabilityHypnosisAnesthesiaHeart rateRelaxation (psychology)Clinical trialSurgeryPhysical therapyInternal medicineBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Clinical hypnosis has been proposed for post-surgical pain management for its potential vagal-mediated anti-inflammatory properties. Evidence is needed to understand its effectiveness for post-surgical recovery. Iin this secondary outcome study, it was hypothesized that surgical oncology patients randomized to receive perioperative clinical hypnosis (CH) would demonstrate greater heart-rate variability (HRV) during rest and relaxation at a 1-month post-surgery assessment compared to a treatment-as-usual group (TAU). Methods After REB approval, trial registration and informed consent, 92 participants were randomized to receive CH (n = 45) or TAU (n = 47). CH participants received a CH session before surgery and during post-surgical in-hospital stay HRV was assessed during rest (5 min) and relaxation (10 min) before and 1-month after surgery. Pain intensity was obtained using a 0–10 numeric rating scale pre and post 1-week and 1-month post surgery. Results One month after surgery, HRV was significantly higher in CH group (n = 29) during rest and relaxation (both p < 0.05, d = 0.73) than TAU group (n = 28). By contrast, rest and relaxation HRV decreased from pre- to 1-month post-surgery for the TAU (both p < 0.001, d > 0.48) but not the CH group. Pain intensity increased from pre-surgery to 1-week post-surgery (p < 0.001, d = 0.50), and decreased from 1-week to 1-month post-surgery (p = 0.005, d = 0.21) for all participants. Discussion The results suggest that hypnosis prevents the deleterious effects of surgery on HRV by preserving pre-operative vagal activity. These findings underscore the potential of clinical hypnosis in mitigating the adverse effects of surgery on autonomic function and may have significant implications for enhancing post-surgical recovery and pain management strategies. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov , identifier (NCT03730350).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.326 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Pain ResearchSame topicPain Management and Placebo EffectFrench-language works237,207