Reporting and Mapping Research Evidence on Perceptions of Clinical Hypnosis Among the General Population and Patients Receiving Health Care Including Cancer Care: A Scoping Review

Figures & data

Figure 1. PRISMA ScR Flow Diagram Illustrating the Literature Filtering and Selection Process.

Table 1. General Population

Article	Country	Sample	Methods	Study details	Key relevant findings
Emslie et al. (2002)	Scotland	432 adult population.	A mail-based survey sent to individuals registered to vote in a specific area.	A survey on the views and opinions about CAM use covering 8 CAM therapies to assess change after 6 years (A follow up on Emslie et al., 1996).	37.7% support NHS-provided hypnotherapy, 2 received hypnotherapy from their GP; primary reason to use hypnotherapy: Stop smoking, stress, phobias (i.e., dental phobia).
Lind et al. (2021) (Study 1)^a	Norway	1049 general population. 540 females. 509 males.	A survey in collaboration with Ipsos (a commercial provider of polling data) with sample randomly drawn from the online panel using quotas on gender, age, and region to ensure a representative distribution.	A large-scale survey as part of a mixed-method feasibility study. Questions asked: (1) Have you ever tried hypnosis? (2) Hypnosis is sometimes useful in medical treatment. How likely is it that you would have said yes to hypnosis carried out by health care professionals?	8% reported having previous experience of hypnosis, 67% reported willingness to accept hypnosis in a medical setting.
Molina and Mendoza (2006)	Spain	80 psychology students, who signed up for 8 hour training in hypnosis (theory & practice). 75% females. 25% males.	From a provided list of 40 adjectives (50% positive, 50% negative), participants selected 5 to characterize hypnosis, ranging from negative to positive. Responses were compared pre- and post-course.	Uncontrolled experimental trial conducted to uncover stereotypical beliefs about hypnosis and the alteration induced by hypnosis training.	Pre-training most frequently chosen words: “interesting” and “therapeutic” as well as “discredited;” after the training, the negative attitudes toward hypnosis had vanished.
Palsson et al. (2019)	United States	1000 adult population. 500 females. 500 males.	Quota-based enrollment to obtain a nationally representative sample regarding sex, age groups, and geographic distribution. Participants did not know prior to enrollment the survey is about hypnosis (prevented self-selection bias).	Cross-sectional survey assessing views and experiences of clinical hypnosis.	Mostly positive (38.6%) or neutral (48.4%) view of clinical hypnosis; 12.8% expressed a negative view; 7.6% had undergone hypnosis treatment and 63.1% reported benefit; 54.9% who had never undergone hypnosis treatment indicated that they would consider; 45.6% believed there was moderate or strong scientific evidence supporting hypnosis; 77.8% identified one or more areas of its use.

CAM = Complementary and Alternative Medicine; NHS = National Health Service; GP = General Practitioner.

^aThis mixed methods study article was diverse enough in terms of the population groups represented that for clarity in presenting findings, the study has been treated as two separate studies.

Table 2. Healthcare

Article	Country	Population	Methods	Study details	Key relevant findings
Barling and De Lucchi (2004)	Australia	186 psychology outpatients. 55.8% females. 38.2% males.	Hypnosis-experienced participants (n = 84) recruited from the waiting rooms of psychological practices of members of ASH; non-experienced participants (n = 102) recruited from the waiting rooms of medical centers.	Cross-sectional questionnaire that investigated knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and motivation toward clinical hypnosis between those with previous experience and those with no experience.	Previous experience with hypnosis was associated with significantly more accurate knowledge, more positive attitudes and beliefs about hypnosis, and greater intention to use clinical hypnosis; Those with no experience had little knowledge of hypnosis but were in favor and quite open to it.
Boutin et al. (2000)	United States	567 outpatients. 47% females. 52% males.	Clinics (n = 16) located at a major municipal medical center.	Anonymous self-administered survey about overall use of 7 categories and 19 types of alternative therapies.	42% reported use of alternative therapies, but only 3% of patients use hypnotherapy; 35% do not know about it; 19% of patients think hypnotherapy should be offered.
Donnet et al. (2022)	England	150 patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). 116 females. 34 males.	Patients attending the hypnotherapy unit at a hospital in a 9–month period were asked to participate in the study offering up to 12 sessions of GFH on a one-to-one basis.	Questionnaires assessing IBS Symptom Severity, Noncolonic Symptom, Quality of Life, HAD, and expectations & perceptions (before and after treatment), including open-ended questions.	62% had never heard of hypnotherapy program before attending; 28% experienced hypnotherapy for other issues; 87.3% did not get negative reactions from relatives regarding hypnotherapy; 55.3% expected it to be helpful. After treatment: 60.7% stated their opinion on hypnotherapy has changed into more positive and enthusiastic; 93.3% would use hypnotherapy for other reasons; 100% would recommend it; 74% scored their recommendation as 10/10.
Glaesmer et al. (2015)	Germany	102 dental patients. 50% females. 50% males.	Patients visiting a dental practice for tooth extraction. Every second patient assigned to TAU or TAU + Hypnosis.	Non-blind randomized control trial evaluating patients’ perspectives on hypnosis pre-, intra-, and post-tooth extraction. Hypnosis administered via CD.	90% had positive attitudes toward hypnosis; 80% of those who received hypnosis believe it reduced their fear during procedure; 22.5% considered hypnosis science-based; 13.7% indicated hypnosis should be used in medical care; 6.9% had negative attitudes toward it.
Harris and Roberts (2008)	England	256 adult IBS sufferers. 73.4% females. 26.6% males.	Mail survey of previously diagnosed individuals with IBS.	Cross-sectional questionnaire of the views, openness, and reservations of IBS patients toward nine treatment modalities.	63.7% indicated approval of hypnotherapy as a treatment. Greater acceptance was found in the younger demographic and if endorsed by a medical professional. Common criticisms: Skepticism, disbelief in efficacy, fear, cost and time-consuming nature.
Hermes et al. (2004)	Germany	310 dental patients. 56.8% females. 43.2% males.	Questionnaires given to inpatients and outpatients of the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery.	Survey evaluating dental patients’ knowledge, attitudes, and motivation to incorporate hypnosis in dental practices.	Most respondents were aware of the clinical use of hypnosis; 31% considered it clinically very useful; 33.2% generally useful; 6.1% rejected it entirely. The primary reason for rejecting it: Lack of information (61.3%); 71.6% would like clinical hypnosis (combined with local anesthesia) before oral surgery; 78.4% considered hypnosis an enrichment of medical therapy.
Hollingworth (2012)	Australia (67%) New Zealand (33%)	337 pregnant women.	Eligible women were identified at antenatal clinics, classes, or within midwifery group practices, as well as among inpatients on the antenatal ward, through posters advertising the trial. All recruited for the HATCh program.	Cross-sectional survey designed to gauge pregnant women’s understanding, past experiences, perceptions, and attitudes toward hypnosis overall and particularly in the context of childbirth.	Most women expressed a positive attitude toward hypnosis despite having no previous hypnosis experience. Over 90% considered hypnosis helpful in birth, relieving pain and reducing anxiety.
Miller et al. (2011)	United States	213 colonoscopy screening patients. 72.8% females. 17.2% males.	Questionnaires administered to African American and Latino patients recruited in a primary care clinic at a large metropolitan hospital.	Cross-sectional survey conducted to assess perceptions of using hypnosis prior to a colonoscopy.	69.9% had positive views toward pre-colonoscopy hypnosis usage. Among them, 14.1% were entirely positive (40/40), while 31.1% were completely negative (0/40), and 54.8% were neutral or had mixed feelings.
Pettigrew et al. (2004)	United States	250 women.	Women’s health clinic patients invited by a registered nurse data collector to complete the questionnaire while waiting for their appointments.	Cross-sectional questionnaire to examine knowledge, use, perceived effectiveness, and sources of information about CAM.	4.8% were using hypnosis among other therapies, 196 rated the perceived effectiveness of hypnosis as 3.04 out of 5; effectiveness rated as higher than the knowledge.
Wang et al. (2003)	United States	1235 respondents. 61% females. 39% males.	An anonymous survey disseminated to all patients seeking non-emergency surgery at a hospital, with a comparison made between the responses of inpatients and outpatients.	Cross-sectional survey assessing differences in attitude and use of CAM between outpatient vs inpatient surgeries.	21% showed willingness to include hypnosis as part of their anesthesia care, with similar interest reported among outpatients and inpatients.

CAM = Complementary and Alternative Medicine; ASH = Australian Society of Hypnosis; GFH = Gut-focused hypnosis; TAU = Treatment as usual; IBS = irritable bowel syndrome; HATCh = Hypnosis Antenatal Training for Childbirth; HAD = Hospital Anxiety and Depression.

Table 3. Cancer Care

Article	Country	Population	Methods	Study details	Key relevant findings
Lind et al. (2021) (Study 2)^a	Norway	5 women with breast cancer.	Pilot study with women scheduled for breast cancer surgery in a hospital, who received hypnosis prior to mastectomy/lumpectomy.	A small-scale pilot study conducting semi-structured interviews as part of a mixed-method feasibility study.	All participants reported positive experiences related to hypnosis, and none described unpleasant side effects or postoperative pain after surgery.
Mendoza et al. (2017)	United States	Patients in active cancer treatment or cancer survivors. 44 recruited & 33 completed. 11% (n = 5) males. 89% (n = 39) females.	Two groups: (1) 4 session treatment and (2) 4 sessions of didactic lectures.	Randomized controlled crossover clinical trial comparing active treatment (VMWH-CBT) with an education control condition. All participants received 4 sessions of both, in counterbalanced order; 37 items with 6–point Likert-type scale measuring: help, control, magical, interest, collaboration/trance, fear, memory, marginal.	Significant increase in positive attitudes toward hypnosis was observed in all scales except for Magical and Collaboration-Trance scales; changes remained stable at 3–month follow-up.
Sohl et al. (2010)	United States	115 adult general population. 70% females. 30% males.	Participants recruited from a public area in a large metropolitan hospital.	A questionnaire using a 5–point Likert scale was employed to evaluate the likelihood of participants using hypnosis to manage the side effects of cancer and its treatment, should they receive a cancer diagnosis.	Majority of patients (89%) were willing to use hypnosis to control side effects associated with cancer treatment; intentions to use hypnosis were not related to gender, ethnicity, education, or age.
Taylor and Ingleton (2003)	England	8 female patients who completed the hypno-chemo program.	6 patients commenced hypnotherapy just before or after their first session of chemotherapy, 1 halfway through chemotherapy and 1 after its completion.	Qualitative study: semi-structured interviews of 30 minutes to 1 hour, conducted between 1 and 24 months (average 7 months) after the intervention.	The combination of therapies may provide advanced skills in coping/adapting to the cancer situation. Hypnotherapy helped to relax, sleep and cope more effectively.
Zaza et al. (2005)	Canada	292 cancer patients.	In-person individual interviews conducted at an outpatient treatment clinic.	Qualitative study: structured interviews of 15 to 30 minutes, with 7 coping strategies discussed: music, breathing exercises, meditation, prayer, muscle relaxation, visualization/imagery, hypnosis/self-hypnosis.	Out of 292 cancer patients, 13 used or were using hypnosis. Of these, 26% were unaware of hypnosis’s potential use in cancer treatment, and 19% were skeptical about hypnosis.

VMWH-CBT = Valencia Model of Waking Hypnosis with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.

^aThis mixed methods study article was diverse enough in terms of the population groups represented that for clarity in presenting findings, the study has been treated as two separate studies.

Emslie, M. J., Campbell, M. K., & Walker, K. A. (2002). Changes in public awareness of, attitudes to, and use of complementary therapy in Northeast Scotland: Surveys in 1993 and 1999. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 10(3), 148–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0965229902000663

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Emslie, M., Campbell, M., & Walker, K. (1996). Complementary therapies in a local healthcare setting. Part I: Is there real public demand? Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 4(1), 39–42.

 Google Scholar

Lind, S. B., Jacobsen, H. B., Solbakken, O. A., & Reme, S. E. (2021). Clinical hypnosis in medical care: A mixed-method feasibility study. Integrative Cancer Therapies, 20, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/15347354211058678

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Molina, J. A., & Mendoza, M. E. (2006). Change of attitudes towards hypnosis after a training course. Australian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 34(2), 146. https://www.londonhypnotherapyuk.com/publications/anxiety-and-sleeping-disorders-paper-final-proofs.pdf#page=32

 Google Scholar

Palsson, O., Twist, S., & Walker, M. (2019). A national survey of clinical hypnosis views and experiences of the adult population in the United States. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 67(4), 428–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207144.2019.1649538

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Barling, N. R., & De Lucchi, D. A. G. (2004). Knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about clinical hypnosis. Australian Journal of Clinical & Experimental Hypnosis, 32(1), 36–52. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/ielapa.200406623

 Google Scholar

Boutin, P. D., Buchwald, D., Robinson, L., & Collier, A. C. (2000). Use of and attitudes about alternative and complementary therapies among outpatients and physicians at a municipal hospital. Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 6(4), 335–343. https://doi.org/10.1089/10755530050120709

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Donnet, A. S., Hasan, S. S., & Whorwell, P. J. (2022). Hypnotherapy for irritable bowel syndrome: Patient expectations and perceptions. Therapeutic Advances in Gastroenterology, 15. https://doi.org/10.1177/17562848221074208

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Glaesmer, H., Geupel, H., & Haak, R. (2015). A controlled trial on the effect of hypnosis on dental anxiety in tooth removal patients. Patient Education and Counseling, 98(9), 1112–1115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2015.05.007

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Harris, L. R., & Roberts, L. (2008). Treatments for irritable bowel syndrome: Patients’ attitudes and acceptability. BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine, 8(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-8-65

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Hermes, D., Hakim, S. G., & Sieg, P. (2004). Acceptance of medical hypnosis by oral and maxillofacial patients. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 52(4), 389–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207140490886227

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Hollingworth, I. (2012). Knowledge and attitudes of pregnant women regarding hypnosis. Australian Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 40(1), 43. https://hipnosisclinica.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/australian-journal-of-clinical-and-experimental-hypnosis-11-2012.pdf#page=49

 Google Scholar

Miller, S. J., Schnur, J. B., Montgomery, G. H., & Jandorf, L. (2011). African-Americans’ and Latinos’ perceptions of using hypnosis to alleviate distress before a colonoscopy. Contemporary Hypnosis & Integrative Therapy, 28(3), 196. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26566440

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Pettigrew, A. C., King, M. O. B., McGee, K., & Rudolph, C. (2004). Complementary therapy use by women’s health clinic clients. Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine, 10(6), 50. https://www.proquest.com/docview/204828855/abstract/2FFF09B96BDA45A1PQ/1?accountid=7014

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Wang, S. M., Caldwell-Andrews, A. A., & Kain, Z. N. (2003). The use of complementary and alternative medicines by surgical patients: A follow-up survey study. Anesthesia & Analgesia, 97(4), 1010–1015. https://doi.org/10.1213/01.ane.0000078578.75597.f3

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Mendoza, M. E., Capafons, A., & Jensen, M. P. (2017). Hypnosis attitudes: Treatment effects and associations with symptoms in individuals with cancer. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 60(1), 50–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/00029157.2017.1300570

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Sohl, S. J., Stossel, L., Schnur, J. B., Tatrow, K., Gherman, A., & Montgomery, G. H. (2010). Intentions to use hypnosis to control the side effects of cancer and its treatment. American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 53(2), 93–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/00029157.2010.10404331

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Taylor, E. E., & Ingleton, C. (2003). Hypnotherapy and cognitive‐behaviour therapy in cancer care: The patients’ view. European Journal of Cancer Care, 12(2), 137–142. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2354.2003.00371.x

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Zaza, C., Sellick, S. M., & Hillier, L. M. (2005). Coping with cancer: What do patients do? Journal of Psychosocial Oncology, 23(1), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1300/j077v23n01_04

 PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar

Data Availability Statement

Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analyzed in this study. This work is based on existing literature rather than original data collection, so there is no specific dataset to share.