Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Hypnosis yields modest reductions in clinical pain compared to non-active controls in meta-analysisHypnosis provides modest pain relief compared to other therapies

AI-generated summary of the cited source, checked by automated accuracy review. How we work

Key Takeaway
Note that hypnosis provides modest pain reduction but is not superior to relaxation, pain education, or CBT.

This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy of hypnosis for patients with clinical pain, incorporating data from 4572 participants. The analysis compared hypnosis against non-active controls, as well as active non-pharmacological interventions including relaxation, pain education, and cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT).

Findings indicate that hypnosis resulted in a modest reduction in pain intensity compared to non-active controls (SMD -0.33). When comparing hypnosis to active controls, the results showed no significant superiority. Specifically, hypnosis did not outperform relaxation (SMD -0.13), pain education (SMD -0.17 to -0.19), or cognitive-behavioural therapy (SMD -0.32). Pre-post change scores were also reported as comparable but non-significant (SMD -0.31).

Clinical implications suggest that while hypnosis may provide some relief, it should not be marketed or presented as a superior treatment compared to other psychological interventions. The evidence indicates that hypnosis provides only small reductions in pain. Practitioners should consider hypnosis as one of several comparable options rather than a primary superior intervention for pain management.

Living with chronic pain is exhausting, and people are always looking for ways to manage it without relying solely on medication. One way people try to find relief is through hypnosis. A large review of clinical trials involving over 4,500 patients looked at how hypnosis works for pain compared to other common methods.

The data shows that hypnosis does lead to a reduction in pain when compared to no active treatment at all. However, the results were much more nuanced when compared to other active therapies. When researchers compared hypnosis to relaxation, pain education, and cognitive-behavioral therapy, hypnosis did not perform better than those methods.

While hypnosis can be a tool for managing pain, it is not a magic fix. The study suggests that while it provides some relief, it is not a superior option over other psychological treatments. If you are looking for ways to manage your pain, these options provide similar levels of relief.

What this means for you:
Hypnosis reduces pain, but it is not more effective than relaxation or other psychological therapies.

Common questions

Is hypnosis more effective than other pain treatments?

No, hypnosis is not more effective than other active treatments. When compared to relaxation, pain education, and cognitive-behavioral therapy, hypnosis did not outperform them. It only showed a reduction in pain when compared to non-active controls.

How much does hypnosis help with pain?

Hypnosis provides modest reductions in clinical pain. While it is a valid option for some patients, it should not be presented as a treatment that is superior to other psychological methods like relaxation or education.

Who is this finding for?

This finding applies to patients with clinical pain. It helps patients and doctors understand that while hypnosis can help, it offers similar results to other common non-pharmacological treatments like cognitive-behavioral therapy.

Study Details

Study typeMeta analysis
Sample sizen = 4,572
EvidenceLevel 1
PublishedSep 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
BACKGROUND: Previous reviews report moderate reductions in clinical pain with hypnotic suggestion but provide only partial views by comparing hypnosis with inactive controls alone or including few studies or mixed control groups. This review comprehensively evaluated the efficacy of hypnosis in reducing clinical pain intensity compared with non-active and active controls. METHODS: Systematic review following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) review guidelines with comprehensive literature search and meta-analysis. A total of 106 studies met inclusion criteria; 104 effect sizes from 84 studies were pooled using random-effects models, and 22 studies were narratively synthesised. Five databases were searched from inception to October 2025 for randomised controlled trials evaluating hypnosis versus non-active or active non-pharmacological controls for clinical pain intensity. Two independent reviewers screened articles and extracted data using standardised tools. RESULTS: Meta-analysis of 57 studies (4572 participants) showed reduced post-intervention pain following hypnosis versus non-active controls (SMD -0.33). Pre-post change scores yielded a comparable but non-significant effect (SMD -0.31). Subgroup analyses showed no differences by pain type, control type or delivery mode. Hypnosis did not outperform active controls, including relaxation (14 studies, SMD -0.13), pain education (7 studies, SMD -0.17 to -0.19) or cognitive-behavioural therapy (5 studies, SMD -0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Hypnosis yields modest reductions in clinical pain comparable to other psychological interventions. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: This review provides a comprehensive synthesis of randomised trials evaluating hypnosis for clinical pain intensity, distinguishing non-active from active comparators and examining delivery mode, pain type and risk of bias. Hypnosis produced only small reductions in pain and did not clearly outperform relaxation, pain education or cognitive-behavioural therapy. These findings refine expectations for hypnoanalgesia, suggesting it may provide low-risk supportive care for selected patients, but should not be presented as a reliably superior pain-reduction treatment option. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero (CRD42024608722).
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.