Mechanisms of Hypnosis: Toward the Development of a Biopsychosocial Model

2016

JPR

BackgroundPeople from different cultures who speak different languages may experience pain differently. This possible variability has important implications for evaluating the validity of pain quality measures that are directly translated into different languages without cultural adaptations. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of language and culture on the validity of pain quality measures by comparing the words that individuals with chronic pain from Nepal use to describe their pain with those used by patients from the USA.MethodsA total of 101 individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain in Nepal were asked to describe their pain. The rates of the different pain descriptor domains and phrases used by the Nepali sample were then compared to the published rates of descriptors used by patients from the USA. The content validity of commonly used measures for assessing pain quality was then evaluated.ResultsWhile there was some similarity between patients from Nepal and the USA in how they describe pain, there were also important differences, especially in how pain quality was described. For example, many patients from Nepal used metaphors to describe their pain. Also, the patients from Nepal often used a category of pain descriptor – which describes a physical state – not used by patients from the USA. Only the original McGill Pain Questionnaire was found to have content validity for assessing pain quality in patients from Nepal, although other existing pain quality measures could be adapted to be content valid by adding one or two additional descriptors, depending on the measure in question.ConclusionThe findings indicate that direct translations of measures that are developed using samples of patients from one country or culture are not necessarily content valid for use in other countries or cultures; some adaptations may be required in order for such measures to be most useful in new language and culture.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Words that describe chronic musculoskeletal pain: implications for assessing pain quality across cultures

Sharma

Pathak

2016

JPR

“…In the context of difficulties in measuring gamma, disagreements about frequencies involved, the focal nature of gamma activities, and their amplitude fluctuation related to other factors such as theta oscillations, it is not surprising that the research results regarding the associations between gamma activity and hypnosis is complex and at times contradictory (De Pascalis, 2007; Jensen et al, in press). Some studies have found higher regional areas of baseline gamma activity in highs relative to lows (Akpinar, Ulett, & Itil, 1971; De Pascalis, 1993; Schnyer & Allen, 1995), and also an increase in gamma activity in response to hypnosis (De Pascalis, 1993).…”

Section: Brain Oscillation Patterns and Hypnosismentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain Oscillations, Hypnosis, and Hypnotizability

American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis

Adachi

Hakimian

2015

Self Cite

In this article, we summarize the state-of-science knowledge regarding the associations between hypnosis and brain oscillations. Brain oscillations represent the combined electrical activity of neuronal assemblies, and are usually measured as specific frequencies representing slower (delta, theta, alpha) and faster (beta, gamma) oscillations. Hypnosis has been most closely linked to power in the theta band and changes in gamma activity. These oscillations are thought to play a critical role in both the recording and recall of declarative memory and emotional limbic circuits. Here we propose that it is this role that may be the mechanistic link between theta (and perhaps gamma) oscillations and hypnosis; specifically that theta oscillations may facilitate, and that changes in gamma activity observed with hypnosis may underlie, some hypnotic responses. If these hypotheses are supported, they have important implications for both understanding the effects of hypnosis, and for enhancing response to hypnotic treatments.

“…[4][5][6][7] A greater focus on biological factors-in particular the role that central nervous system structures and processes play in experience of pain-may be used to inform the development of neuromodulatory interventions that could enhance the efficacy of psychosocial interventions, and help to better understand how psychosocial interventions influence pain. [8][9][10][11][12] Two neurophysiological factors that could potentially play an important role in pain and its effects on behavior are the behavioral inhibition and behavioral activation systems (BIS and BAS, respectively). [13][14][15] In Gray's theory of brain function and behavior, BIS and BAS represent 2 distinct physiologically based brain systems that determine how people will respond to signs of potential punishment and/or reward (see also [16][17][18].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pain Intensity, Headache Frequency, and the Behavioral Activation and Inhibition Systems

The Clinical Journal of Pain

Tan

Chua

2015

Self Cite

The findings are consistent with predictions based on a model hypothesizing that pain has a nonlinear impact on both BIS and BAS, with a stronger impact on BIS than BAS. If the current results are replicated in other samples, including samples of individuals with chronic pain, they have important implications for identifying biological factors that could influence pain and behavioral responses to pain, as well as for the development and evaluation of treatments that could enhance positive treatment outcomes.