The use of hypnosis in gastroscopy: a comparison with intravenous sedation

A total of 124 subjects who were undergoing routine endoscopy were randomly assigned to one of three groups. All three groups received lignocaine thro at spray. The fist group additionally received midazolam, me second receive d hypnosis, whilst the third only received lignocaine throat spray. Althoug h hypnotised patients were deemed by an independent observer to be less agi tated than the other two groups (p<0.03), they reported the gastroscopy to be significantly more uncomfortable (p<0.042) and scored higher in their me mory for the procedure (p<0.001). They also took slightly longer to induce than the midazolam group. The midazolam group on the other hand rated the p rocedure as significantly more comfortable although paradoxically were seen by an independent observer as being more agitated. They were also signific antly more amnesic. The endoscopist encountered more procedural difficultie s with this group but this did not reach levels of significance. Hypnosis w as not shown to be an effective alternative to intravenous sedation in gast roscopy.