Hypnotherapy is widely recognised, as a method for aiding smoking cessation, however, conflicting evidence exists regarding its efficacy. In meta analysis hypnosis proved 3 times more effective than nicotine replacement methods, and 15 times more effective than stopping without help (Schmidt and Chockalingham, 1992). Having said this, results are not always clean cut. A number of studies report a mixture of success rates i.e. 90.6% (Barber, 2001), 90% (Klager, 2004), and 80% (Crasilneck, 1990), while others report much lower rates of success at 48% (Elkins and Rajab, 2004) and 25% (Ahijevych, Yerardi and Nedilsky, 2000). Something else to consider is the variety of methods that may be adopted in order to treat smoking cessation with hypnosis, as the efficacy of these methods may also vary (Crasilneck, 1990; Barber, 2001; Spiegel, Frischholz, Fleiss and Spiegel, 1993). However, the constant variable within smoking cessation treatment is the patient. Therefore, treatment tailored towards the individual needs of the smoker needs to be considered when evaluating the best approach to therapy.
This is a non-clinical case study exploring whether multi session tailored treatment may better serve the individual needs of certain smokers. Therefore, hypnotherapeutic techniques are tailored to the patient’s needs in order to achieve optimum success. The patient (D) is a male actor. He lives with his partner who has recently stopped smoking with hypnosis. He is 31 yrs old and has been smoking for 18yrs. This is D’s third attempt at smoking cessation. Initially D attempted to stop smoking without help and was unsuccessful. D’s second attempt involved single session smoking cessation, and failed to achieve lasting results. Therefore a multi session, tailored approach was adopted in order to evaluate whether this approach may prove more successful. A variety of hypnotherapeutic methods were employed over 4 treatment sessions of approximately 90 minutes in length. The second and third sessions were held on consecutive days 3 days after the initial session and a follow up session was held one week after this.
It is not surprising that D’s unaided attempt to stop smoking was unsuccessful as epidemiological data suggests that only 5% of the 46% of smokers who try to stop without help are successful (Giovino, Henningfield, Tomar, Escobedo and Slade, 1996). Furthermore, it could be argued that low success rates regarding unaided cessation
Case Study, London.
may be due, in part, to absence of placebo effect. Varied success is reported in a critical review of hypnosis against placebo (Green and Lynn, 2000). Yet, the placebo effect is inherent within hypnosis and, therefore, cannot be discarded (Mitchell and Cormack, 1998; Wall and Wheeler, 1996). After all, there is a wealth of research to suggest the positive effects of placebo with or without hypnosis (Brown, 1998; Horgan, 1999; Kirsch et al, 2002; Leuchter, 2002; Greenberg, 2003). Moreover, it is suggested...