N.B. This page offers the scientific evidence for the ‘success in one session’ that I offer
So if you are looking for stop smoking treatment use the menu bar for the “stop smoking session”
When we make claims about the number of people on average who are successful at stopping smoking using different methods we have to be able to provide where this information comes from. This is what this section is about.
This paper presents some of the findings from a study looking at all methods of smoking cessation, including standard hypnotherapy techniques and compares those to a specially developed advanced method of hypnotherapy for smoking cessation.
THE METHOD I USE IS THE ‘PRACTICE BUILDERS METHOD described below.
Practice Builders Study (2000-2002)
|
| This research was carried out on 300 subjects (beginning in January 2000 and continuing until March 2002) who responded to an advertisement. A ‘blind trial’ technique was used-subjects were not aware that they were taking part in a research project although they all ticked a box on their intake forms saying that they understood that the hypnotist’s methods were always being measured tested and improved, and that results would be collated and studied. Client confidentiality was assured so that their data could be used but not their names and these subjects were randomly allocated to receive either ‘standard’ hypnotherapy or a special formulation of hypnotherapy which Practice Builders has termed ‘advanced therapy’. 51% of respondents were male and 49% female; the median age of all subjects was 44 years.No respondents had previous experience of hypnosis-51% of subjects had tried nicotine patches, 14% had tried nicotine gum, 7% had tried acupuncture, 6% had tried using a nicotine inhaler and 30% had previously tried to quit using will-power alone. 11% of subjects had not previously tried to quit smoking.For all subjects: The client was interviewed to make sure that they wanted to stop smoking for their own reasons, and were not being pressured into it by someone else (doctor, loved one etc.).The price was kept high to establish commitment, and to avoid people who were casually or speculatively trying hypnosis (as opposed to those who have some commitment, confidence or belief that hypnosis would help them to stop smoking). |
| Before the actual hypnosis, the client (or subject) is asked a series of questions about their smoking habit and their beliefs. They are asked, for example:- ‘What fears do you have about stopping?’ – ‘What do you know about hypnosis?’ Hypnosis was then fully explained to the client, as well as how the conscious and the subconscious mind works, and any myths debunked (such as, you cannot make someone do something they don’t want to do, hypnosis is not sleep or unconsciousness, you will be aware of everything that is going on and will remember everything that happened in hypnosis after the session, you can stop the session at any time, etc.). This is called the “pre-talk”.A hypnotic contract is then entered into, in which the client agrees to go along with all techniques and to accept all the suggestions that are for their benefit.For subjects treated with the standard technique: A basic stop smoking technique is used. This type of standard technique doesn’t allow for much in the way of personalising a session, as it is the same for every client. The wording of some of the best basic techniques uses hypnotic language patterns (Neuro Linguistic Programming). The client is then emerged.For subjects treated with the advanced technique: Hypnosis is induced using a progressive test induction tailored to the client. Ideo motor techniques are used to gain subconscious communication. The client’s own motivations, Meta programmes, and values are utilised in the session using a combination of metaphor and suggestion. NLP sub-modality and anchoring techniques are used according to the client’s processing style. At the end of the session, the client is emerged from hypnosis and the change is tested, then future paced and ratified. |
FindingsQuit rates were established through telephone interviews 1 month and 6 months after the first session of treatment. Of those who received ‘advanced therapy’,95% had quit smoking after 1 session – considering working with a hypnotherapist in this fashion an easy way to stop smoking. The remaining 5% received a second session of treatment leading to a further 1.3% of the group quitting smoking. In total therefore, at 6 months,97% of those who received ‘advanced therapy’ had quit smoking. Of those who received ‘standard therapy’ 51% quit smoking after one session and a further 6% quit after a second session-a total of 57% had quit smoking at 6 months. |
| Those who were still smoking at 6 months did not differ from those who had successfully quit in terms of gender, age or therapies previously tried. These results mean that for both standard treatments and the ‘advanced treatment’ quit rates are extraordinarily high and well above what has hitherto been reported in the literature.Results for both treatments were significant at the 0.001 level (chi-square).Outcomes for the ‘advanced therapy’ are considerably higher than any findings previously reported in the literature. In addition, the success rate achieved using the standard technique was considerably higher than expected and this may be due to the fact that the elements that the standard treatment and ‘advanced treatment’ have in common have powerful effects on outcomes. |
High quit smoking rates for hypnosis compared
to other methods
A larger meta-analysis of research into hypnosis to aid smoking cessation (Chockalingam and Schmidt 1992) (48 studies, 6,020 subjects) found that the average quit rate for those using hypnosis was 36%, making hypnosis the most effective method found in this review with the exception of a programme which encouraged pulmonary and cardiac patients to quit smoking using advice from their doctor (such subjects are obviously atypical as they have life-threatening illnesses which are aggravated by smoking and therefore these people have very strong incentives to quit).
| Table 1. Effectiveness of different types of intervention to achieve smoking cessation adapted from data in Chockalingam and Schmidt |
||||
| Type of intervention | % who quit smoking | no. of subjects | no. of trials | |
| Advice (cardiac patients) | 42 | 4553 | 34 | |
| Hypnosis | 36 | 6020 | 48 | |
| Miscellaneous | 35 | 1400 | 10 | |
| Advice (pulmonary patients) | 34 | 1661 | 17 | |
| Smoke aversion | 31 | 2557 | 103 | |
| Group withdrawal clinics | 30 | 11580 | 46 | |
| Acupuncture | 30 | 2992 | 19 | |
| Instructional methods in workplace | 30 | 976 | 13 | |
| Other aversive techniques | 27 | 3926 | 178 | |
| 5 day plans | 26 | 7828 | 25 | |
| Aversive methods in | 25 | 1041 | 26 | |
| Educational (health promotion initiatives) | 24 | 3352 | 27 | |
| Medication | 18 | 6810 | 29 | |
| Physician interventions (more than advice) | 18 | 3486 | 16 | |
| Nicotine chewing gum | 16 | 4866 | 40 | |
| Self-care (self-help) | 15 | 3585 | 24 | |
| Physician advice | 7 | 7190 | 17 | |
| Law and Tang (1995) looked at 10 randomised trials, carried out between 1975 and 1988, of hypnosis in smoking cessation. They found that the effect of hypnosis was highly statistically significant1. The research they examined involved 646 subjects and cessation rates at 6 months post-treatment ranged from 10% to 38% (the average figure was 24%). | ||||
| Table 2. Effectiveness of different types of intervention to achieve smoking cessation (adapted from data in Law and Tang 1995) | |||
| Type of intervention | % who quit smoking | no. of subjects | no. of trials |
| Supportive group session (heart attack survivors) | 36 | 223 | 1 |
| Hypnosis | 24 | 646 | 10 |
| Supportive group session (healthy men in high risk for heart attack group) | 21 | 13205 | 4 |
| Nicotine patch (self-referral) | 13 | 2020 | 10 |
| Nicotine gum (self-referral | 11 | 3460 | 13 |
| Supportive group session (in pregnancy) | 8 | 4738 | 10 |
| Advice from GP (additional sessions) | 5 | 6466 | 10 |
| Gradual reduction in smoking | 5 | 630 | 8 |
| Nicotine patch (GP initiated treatment) | 4 | 2597 | 4 |
| Nicotine gum (GP initiated treatment) | 3 | 7146 | 15 |
| Acupuncture | 3 | 2759 | 8 |
| Advice from GP (one-off) | 2 | 14438 | 17 |
| Supportive group session | 2 | 2059 | 8 |
| Advice from nurses in health promotion clinics | 1 | 3369 | 2 |
| Table 2 (above) shows that the meta-analysis of Law and Tang confirms, to a large extent, the meta-analysis of Chockalingam and Schmidt (1992); in both cases hypnosis appears as the most effective form of intervention to achieve smoking cessation with the exception of groups who are highly motiviated to quit for medical reasons, such as those with existing heart or pulmonary problems. | |||
A more recent study, by Ahijevych et al (2000), produces a similar overall figure for the success of hypnosis. This study looked at a randomly selected sample of 2,810 smokers who participated in single-session, group hypnotherapy smoking cessation programs sponsored by the American Lung Association of Ohio. A randomly selected sample of 452 participants completed telephone interviews 5 to 15 months after attending a treatment session. 22 percent of participants reported not smoking during the month prior to the interview.
Tailored HypnosisThe results discussed so far indicate that when the bulk of random trials are considered hypnosis is shown to be the most effective intervention for achieving smoking cessation. Yet this is only half the story-many of the trials discussed so far have used very brief sessions, using standardised hypnosis techniques, many have in fact taken place in group sessions (making it difficult to tailor to each individual’s needs) and have not necessarily been carried out by expert practitioners of hypnosis. If, under these circumstances, hypnosis can achieve such positive outcomes in terms of enabling smokers to quit, then what might be achieved using programmes of hypnosis which are carried out by expert hypnotists and are tailored to the needs of the individual who wants to stop smoking? Nuland and Field (1970) found an improvement rate of 60% in treating smokers with hypnosis. The increased effectiveness was achieved by a more personalised approach, including feedback (under hypnosis) of the client’s own personal reasons for quitting. These researchers also employed a technique of having the client maintain contact by telephone between treatments and utilized self-hypnosis in addition. |
Von Dedenroth (1968) devised an innovative unique approach which appears to have been extremely successful. He began by inquiring how long the individual had smoked, whether they recalled why they had begun, whether they had ever tried to stop smoking, why they wanted to stop smoking at this particular point in time, what benefit, if any, they felt that they derived from smoking, at what specific times they felt the need most strongly (after meals, before breakfast etc.), and finally he asked them how many cigarettes they smoked. Von Dedenroth believed that answering these questions not only tended to increase rapport but also revealed, at least in part, the smoker’s own feelings regarding his smoking and his reasons for wanting to give up the habit. The therapy proper did not begin until the second session, and at this time the smoker was told that ‘Q Day’ or ‘Quitting Day’ would be 21 days from that point. The smoker was also told to change his favourite brand of cigarettes and resolve to never smoke that brand again. The smoker is then told that they are not to smoke at all:
The smoker was told that, at the times mentioned above, he was to get into the habit of going to the bath-room, gargling with mouthwash and cleaning his teeth. He should have a glass of fruit juice upon awakening and he was told to notice the fresh feeling in his mouth in the morning and following each of these routines. After his breakfast, he was to clean his teeth again and use the mouthwash, paying close attention to the clean feeling in his mouth. Thirty minutes later he was allowed to have a cigarette, but not before. This tended to break the association between the taste of food and the inevitable cigarette that usually followed a meal. He was also told to get a small note-book to carry with him, and to write down, from time to time, his reasons for giving up smoking (physical, financial and personal). Then a trance state was induced and the above suggestions, given in the waking state, were repeated and consequently greatly reinforced. Following the trance, the patient was encouraged to ask questions, and the next appointment arranged. |
|
The third session occurred around one week later (and a week before ‘Q day’)-in this session the smoker was told that they should not drink alcohol at all, or at least to drink alcohol only with meals, with the intention of breaking the association between alcohol and smoking. A trance state is again induced and all the previous instructions reinforced. It is also suggested that smoking will no longer be enjoyable. In particular the smoker was told that the first puff of a cigarette may be enjoyable, the second less enjoyable, and the third may possibly irritate the nose, throat or chest. The aim of this is that by the time ‘Q Day’ arrives the smoker may only be taking a few puffs of each cigarette a day; as the number of cigarettes smoked, and the amount of each of those cigarettes smoked, has declined, then it should be less painful for the individual to quit.Von Dedenroth believed that the fact that the individual is able to reduce and stop smoking (with the aid of hypnosis) gives the individual a great feeling of self-accomplishment. ‘Q day’ begins with the induction of a trance state and it is emphasised continually to the smoker that bad habits have been replaced by good ones, and that for several weeks cigarettes have become more and more unpleasant.Von Dedenroth found that his use of hypnosis enabled 94% of 1000 subjects to stop smoking (when checked at 18 months).
|
| Frank, R. G., Umlauf, R. L, Wonderlich, S. A., & Ashkanazi, G. S. (1986). Hypnosis and behavioral treatment in a worksite smoking cessation program. Addict.Behav., 11, 59-62.Frederick, C. & McNeal, S. (1993). From strength to strength: “inner strength” with immature ego states. AmJ.CIin.Hypn., 35, 250-256.Gonzales, D. H., Nides, M. A., Ferry, L. H., Kustra, R. P., Jamerson, B. D., Segall, N., Herrero, L. A., Krishen, A., Sweeney, A., Buaron, K., & Metz, A. (2001). Bupropion SR as an aid to smoking cessation in smokers treated previously with bupropion: a randomized placebo-controlled study. Clin.Pharmacol.Ther.. 69, 438-444.German, A. (1992). Another perspective on hypnotism. J.R.Soc.Health, 112, 312.Gravitz, M. A. (1988). Early uses of hypnosis in smoking cessation and dietary management: a historical note. AmJ.CIin.Hypn., 31, 68-69.Green, J. P. & Lynn, S. J. (2000). Hypnosis and suggestion-based approaches to smoking cessation: an examination of the evidence. Int.J.CIin.Exp.Hypn., 48, 195-224.Hall, J. A. & Crasilneck, H. B. (1970). Development of a hypnotic technique for treating chronic cigarette smoking. Int.J.CIin.Exp.Hypn., 18, 283-289.Hall, J. A. & Crasilneck, H. B. (1978). Hypnosis. JAMA. 239, 760-761.Haustein, K. O. (2000). Pharmacotherapy of nicotine dependence. Int.J.CIin.Pharmacol.Ther.. 38, 273-290.Haxby, D. G. (1995). Treatment of nicotine dependence. AmJ.Health Syst.Pharm., 52* 265-281.Hays, J. T., Croghan, I. T., Schroeder, D. R., Offord, K. P., Hurt, R. D., Wolter, T. D., Nides, M. A., & Davidson, M. (1999). Over-the-counter nicotine patch therapy for smoking cessation: results from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, and open label trials. Am.J.Public Health, 89, 1701-1707.Hays, J. T., Croghan, I. T., Schroeder, D. R., Offord, K. P., Hurt, R. D., Wolter, T. D., Nides, M. A., & Davidson, M. (1999). Over-the-counter nicotine patch therapy for smoking cessation: results from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, and open label trials. AmJ.Public Health, 89, 1701-1707. |
| Hempstead, J. S. (2001). Clinical hypnotherapy for smoking cessation. Prof.Nurse, 17*265.Holroyd, J. (1991). The uncertain relationship between hypnotizability and smoking treatment outcome. Int.J.CIin.Exp.Hvpn., 39, 93-102.Horwitz, M. B., Hindi-Alexander, M., & Wagner, T. J. (1985). Psychosocial mediators of abstinence, relapse, and continued smoking: a one-year follow-up of a minimal intervention. Addict.Behav., 10, 29-39.Hughes, J. A., Sanders, L. D., Dunne, J. A., Tarpey, J., & Vickers, M. D. (1994). Reducing smoking. The effect of suggestion during general anaesthesia on postoperative smoking habits. Anaesthesia, 49, 126-128.Hyman, G. J., Stanley, R. O., Burrows, G. D., & Home, D. J. (1986). Treatment effectiveness of hypnosis and behaviour therapy in smoking cessation: a methodological refinement. Addict.Behav., 11, 355-365.Jamerson, B. D., Nides, M., Jorenby, D. E., Donahue, R., Garrett, P., Johnston, J. A., Fiore, M. C, Rennard, S. I., & Leischow, S. J. (2001). Late-term smoking cessation despite initial failure: an evaluation of bupropion sustained release, nicotine patch, combination therapy, and placebo. Clin.Ther., 23, 744-752.Janik, A. J. (1993). Hypnotism curse or cure-October 1992. J.R.Soc.Health, 113, 50.Jeffrey, L. K. & Jeffrey, T. B. (1988). Exclusion therapy in smoking cessation: a brief communication. Int.J.CIin.Exp.Hypn., 36, 70-74.Jeffrey, T. B., Jeffrey, L. K., Greuling, J. W., & Gentry, W. R. (1985). Evaluation of a brief group treatment package including hypnotic induction for maintenance of smoking cessation: a brief communication. Int.J.CIin.Exp.Hvpn., 33. 95-98.Johnson, D. L. & Karkut, R. T. (1994). Performance by gender in a stop-smoking program combining hypnosis and aversion. Psychol.Rep., 75, 851-857. |
| Jorenby, D. E., Leischow, S. J., Nides, M. A., Rennard, S. L, Johnston, J. A., Hughes, A. R., Smith, S. S., Muramoto, M. L., Daughton, D. M., Doan, K., Fiore, M. C, & Baker, T. B. (1999). A controlled trial of sustained-release bupropion, a nicotine patch, or both for smoking cessation. N.Engl.J.Med., 340. 685-691.Kaufert, J. M., Rabkin, S. W., Syrotuik, J., Boyko, E., & Shane, F. (1986). Health beliefs as predictors of success of alternate modalities of smoking cessation: results of a controlled trial. J.Behav.Med., 9, 475-489.Kinnunen, T. (2001). Integrating hypnosis into a comprehensive smoking cessation intervention: comments on past and present studies. Int.J.CIin.Exp.Hypn., 49^ 267-271.Kline, M. V. & Under, M. (1969). Psychodynamic factors in the experimental investigation of hypnotically induced emotions with particular reference to blood glucose measurements. J.Psychol., 71, 21-25.Kline, M. V. (1970). The use of extended group hypnotherapy sessions in controlling cigarette habituation. Int.J.CIin.Exp.Hypn., 18, 270-282.Kline, M. V. (1971). Research in hypnotherapy: studies in behavior organization. Bibl.Psychiatr.. 147. 67-87.Kline, M. V. (1972). The production of antisocial behavior through hypnosis: new clinical data. IntJ.CIin.Exp.Hypn., 20. 80-94.Kline, M. V. (1979). Hypnosis with specific relation to biofeedback and behavior therapy. Theoretical and clinical considerations. Psychother.Psychosom., 31, 294-300.Lambe, R., Osier, C., & Franks, P. (1986). A randomized controlled trial of hypnotherapy for smoking cessation. J.Fam.Pract., 22, 61-65.Lando, H. A. (1996). Smoking cessation products and programs. Alaska Med., 38, 65-68.Law, M. & Tang, J. L. (1995). An analysis of the effectiveness of interventions intended to help people stop smoking. Arch.Intern.Med., 155, 1933-1941. |
| Lynn, S. J., Kirsch, L, Barabasz, A., Cardena, E., & Patterson, D. (2000). Hypnosis as an empirically supported clinical intervention: the state of the evidence and a look to the future. Int.J.CIin.Exp.Hvpn.. 48. 239-259.Lynn, S. J. & Shindler, K. (2002). The role of hypnotizability assessment in treatment. Am.J.CIin.Hvpn.. 44. 185-197.Molimard, M. & Hirsch, A. (1990). [Methods of stopping smoking]. Rev.Mal Respir., 7, 307-312.Murray, R. P., Bailey, W. C., Daniels, K., Bjornson, W. M., Kurnow, K., Connett, J. E., Nides, M. A., & Kiley, J. P. (1996). Safety of nicotine polacrilex gum used by 3,094 participants in the Lung Health Study. Lung Health Study Research Group. Chest. 109. 438-445.Murray, R. P., Nides, M. A., Istvan, J. A., & Daniels, K. (1998). Levels of cotinine associated with long-term ad-libitum nicotine polacrilex use in a clinical trial. Addict.Behav., 23. 529-535.Murray, R. P., Anthonisen, N. R., Connett, J. E., Wise, R. A., Lindgren, P. G., Greene, P. G., & Nides, M. A. (1998). Effects of multiple attempts to quit smoking and relapses to smoking on pulmonary function. Lung Health Study Research Group. J.CIin.EpidemioL 51. 1317-1326.Myles, P. S. (1992). Cessation of smoking following tape suggestion under anesthesia. Anaesth.Intensive Care, 20, 540-541.Myles, P. S., Hendrata, M., Layher, Y., Williams, N. J., Hall, J. L, Moloney, J. T., & Powell, J. (1996). Double-blind, randomized trial of cessation of smoking after audiotape suggestion during anesthesia. Br.J.Anaesth., 76, 694-698.Neufeld, V. & Lynn, S. J. (1988). A single-session group self-hypnosis smoking cessation treatment: a brief communication. Int.J.CIin.Exp.Hypn., 36, 75-79.Nides, M., Rand, C., Doice, J., Murray, R., O’Hara, P., Voelker, H., & Connett, J. (1994). Weight gain as a function of smoking cessation and 2-mg nicotine gum use among middle-aged smokers with mild lung impairment in the first 2 years of the Lung Health Study. Health Psvchol.. 13. 354-361. |
| Nides, M. A., Tashkin, D. P., Simmons, M. S., Wise, R. A., Li, V. C., & Rand, C. S. (1993). Improving inhaler adherence in a clinical trial through the use of the nebulizer chronolog. Chest. 104. 501-507.Nides, M. A., Rakos, R. F., Gonzales, D., Murray, R. P., Tashkin, D. P., Bjornson-Benson, W. M., Lindgren, P., & Connett, J. E. (1995). Predictors of initial smoking cessation and relapse through the first 2 years of the Lung Health Study. J.Consult Clin.Psvchol.. 63. 60-69.Nuland, W and Field P.B.(1970). Smoking and Hypnosis. IntJ.CIin.Exp.Hypn 18. 290-306Page, R. A. (1999). Identifying hypnotic sequelae: the problem of attribution. Am.J.CIin.Hvpn.. 41. 316-318.Parameswaran, P. G. (2001). Try hypnotherapy and acupuncture. Tex.Med., 97, 9-10.Rabkin, S. W., Boyko, E., Shane, F., & Kaufert, J. (1984). A randomized trial comparing smoking cessation programs utilizing behaviour modification, health education or hypnosis. Addict.Behav., 9. 157-173.Schoenberger, N. E. (2000). Research on hypnosis as an adjunct to cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy. IntJ.CIin.Exp.Hypn., 48, 154-169.Schwartz, J. L. (1979). Review and evaluation of methods of smoking cessation, 1969-77. Summary of a monograph. Public Health Rep.. 94. 558-563.Schwartz, J. L. (1991). Methods for smoking cessation. Clin.Chest Ned.. 12. 737-753.Shewchuk, L. A. (1976). Smoking cessation programs of the American Health Foundation. Prev.Med., 5. 454-474.Shewchuk, L. A., Dubren, R., Burton, D., Forman, M., Clark, R. R., & Jaffin, A. R. (1977). Preliminary observations on an intervention program for heavy smokers. Int.J.Addict.. 12. 323-336.Shiffman, S. 1. (1993). Smoking Cessation Treatment: Any Progress? Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology. 61, 718-722.Simon, E. P. & James, L. C. (1999). Clinical applications of hypnotherapy in a medical setting. Hawaii Med.J.. 58. 344-347.Sorensen, G., Beder, B., Prible, C. R., & Pinney, J. (1995). Reducing smoking at the workplace: implementing a smoking ban and hypnotherapy. J.Occup.Environ.Med., 37, 453-460. |
| Spiegel, D., Frischholz, E. J., Fleiss, J. L., & Spiegel, H. (1993). Predictors of smoking abstinence following a single-session restructuring intervention with self-hypnosis. Am.J.Psychiatry. 150, 1090-1097.Stanton, H. E. (1991). Smoking cessation in a single session: an update. Int.J.Psychosom.. 38, 84-88.Sykes, V. C. (1992). Hypnosis. J.R.Soc.Health. 112. 312.Tashkin, D., Kanner, R., Bailey, W., Buist, S., Anderson, P., Nides, M., Gonzales, D., Dozier, G., Patel, M. K., & Jamerson, B. (2001). Smoking cessation in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial. Lancet, 357, 1571-1575.Tonnesen, P. & Wennike, P. 1 (1999). [Hypnosis for smoking cessation]. Uaeskr.Laeqer. 161. 4270-4272.Tori, C. D. (1978). A smoking satiation procedure with reduced medical risk. J.CIin.Psvchol.. 34. 574-577.Valbo, A. & Eide, T. (1996). Smoking cessation in pregnancy: the effect of hypnosis in a randomized study. Addict.Behav., 21, 29-35.Viswesvaran, C. 1. & Schmidt, F. L. (1992). A Meta-Analytic Comparison of the Effectiveness of Smoking Cessation Methods. Journal of Applied Psvcholoqy.77(4): 554-561. August 1992.Von Dedenroth, T. E. (1968). The use of hypnosis in 1000 cases of “tobaccomaniacs”. Am.J.CIin.Hypn.. 10. 194-197.Wagner, T. J., Hindi-Alexander, M., & Horwitz, M. B. (1983). A one-year follow-up study of the Damon Group Hypnosis Smoking Cessation Program. J.Okla.State Med.Assoc.. 76, 414-417.Wick, E., Sigman, R., & Kline, M. V. (1971). Hypnotherapy and therapeutic education in the treatment of obesity: differential treatment factors. Psvchiatr.Q.. 45. 234-254.Williams, J. M. & Hall, D. W. (1988). Use of single session hypnosis for smoking cessation. Addict.Behav.. 13. 205-208.Wong, M. & Burrows, G. (1995). Clinical hypnosis. Aust.Fam.Physician, 24, 778-81, 783. |
| Rigotti, N. (1997). Efficacy of a Smoking Cessation Program for Hospital. Arch.Intern.Med.. 157, 2653-2660.1. Combined results were statistically significant at the .001 level, meaning that there is less than a one in a thousand chance that these |
How 1 in 5 have given up smoking
New Scientist Vol. 136, Issue 1845, 31st October 1992, page 6
Hypnosis is the most effective way of giving up smoking, according to the largest ever scientific comparisons of ways of breaking the habit. Willpower it turns out counts for very little.
Smokers are coming under increasing pressure to quit. Earlier this month the Institute of Actuaries published the results of a study it commissioned which showed that the mortality rate for smokers is twice as high as for non smokers and that on average, a smoker dies 6 years earlier than a non smoker. Surveys suggest that 3 n 4 smokers would like to give up, according to the anti smoking campaign Action on Smoking and Health (ASH).
To find the most effective ways to give up smoking, Frank Schmidt and research student Chookalngma Viswesvaran of the university of Iowa carried out a mote-analysis, statistically combining the result of more than 600 studies covering more than 72,000 people from America, Scandinavia and elsewhere in Europe.
By combining the results of so many studies the meta-analysis enables the real effectiveness of each technique to be picked out from the statistical noise that often blights studies involving smaller numbers of subjects.
The results published in the current issue of the journal Of Applied Psychology, show that the average success rate of all methods was 19%, that is only about 1 in 5 smokers is likely to succeed using methods covered by the study.
Patients told that they had serious cardiac disorders, and so a clear incentive to stop immediately, had the highest quitting rate at 36%. But for most smokers the most effective technique was hypnosis in which smokers go into a deep state of relaxation and listen to suggestive tapes. The analysis of treatment by hypnosis, which included 48 studies covering over 6,000 smokers, gave an average success rate of 30% for this method.
‘Combination techniques, combining for example exercises and breathing therapy, came second with a success rate of 29 per cent. Smoke aversion in which smokers have their own warm, stale cigarette smoke blown back into their faces, achieved a 25 per cent rate, followed by acupuncture at 24 per cent.
The least successful method turned out to be advice from GP’s which appeared to convince virtually no one to give up. Sheer willpower proved little better, with a success rate of only 6 per cent. Self-help, in the form of books or mail order advice, achieved modest success – around 9 per cent, while nicotine gum was a little better at 10 per cent.
‘We found that involvement of physicians did not have as big an impact as we expected’ said Schmidt, ‘We speculate that the reason is that it is the content of the treatment that matters, and not the status of the person giving it’.
David Pollock director of ASH, said he was surprised by the success of hypnosis, which anecdotal evidence had suggested was not very effective. One organisation not surprised by the results in the British Society of Medical and Dental hypnosis. Christopher Pattinson, the society’s academic chairman, said that current hypnosis techniques are a far cry from their popular image of music-hall tricks involving swinging fob-watches. The latest relaxation techniques achieving success rates of up to 60 per cent from a single session, he said.
Richard Doll, the epidemiologist who carried out the pioneering studies of the risk of smoking, said that the apparent success of hypnosis and the high quitting rate of patients with heart disease backed his own observations. He added however that he was somewhat surprised by the low success rate of those who resorted to willpower alone. ‘The majority of people find it not too difficult to give up”, he said, “the only way to succeed is to want to do it enough. You have got to really appreciate what the risk is. I smoked and gave up without too much difficulty”.