Cited by 18Cancer survivorship and careWomen's cancer prevention and managementSexual function and dysfunction studies

Phase II randomized controlled trial of hypnosis versus progressive muscle relaxation for body image after breast or gynecologic cancer

Barton, Debra L., Brooks, Trevor M., Cieslak, Alison, Elkins, Gary R., Clark, Patricia M., Baydoun, Mohamad, Smith, Asa B., Van Poznak, Catherine H.·2019·Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Abstract

Background Sexual dysfunction, fueled by body image stress, is prevalent in women with a history of breast or gynecologic cancer. Preliminary data support that mind-body connections may improve sexual health outcomes through improving body image.Objective This randomized controlled trial compared hypnosis to progressive muscle relaxation (PMR). The primary outcome was body image at week 6 as measured by the Impact of Treatment Scale for women who have or have had breast or gynecologic cancer.Interventions/methods Consented participants were randomized 2:1 to hypnosis or PMR. Both arms consisted of three face-to-face sessions delivered by a trained therapist. Sessions were every 2 weeks for 6 weeks; participants practiced at home between sessions using an audio recording.Results Eighty-seven women were randomized, 59 to hypnosis and 28 to PMR. Both groups reported significant improvements on body image over time (within group effect size Cohen's d = 0.49-0.75) with no significant difference between groups (p = 0.15). Secondary outcomes were not significantly different between groups. The hypnosis group improved more in sexual satisfaction and sexual interest while the PMR group improved more in positive affect.Conclusions Interventions facilitating mind-body connections such as hypnosis and PMR may help to improve body image. This study suggests that stress relieving strategies of hypnosis and PMR may contribute to providing a re-connection to one's body, improved positive affect, and overall better sexual health.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10549-019-05395-6

Cites

25 of 25 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Barton, D. L., Brooks, T. M., Cieslak, A., Elkins, G. R., Clark, P. M., Baydoun, M., Smith, A. B., & Van Poznak, C. H.
Affiliations
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • Baylor University (US)
  • University of Calgary (CA)
Corresponding author
Barton, Debra L.
Venue
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
Published
2019-08-09
Volume
178
Issue
2
Pages
357-365
ISSN
  • 0167-6806 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7217
OpenAlex
W2967410501
Cited by
18
References
25
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1
FWCI
0.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Breast Cancer Research and Treatment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Breast Cancer Research Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Women's cancer prevention and management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Sexual function and dysfunction studies
Keywords
hypnosis, progressive muscle relaxation, body image, breast cancer survivors, gynecologic cancer survivors, sexual dysfunction, sexual satisfaction, sexual interest, positive affect, mind-body interventions, stress reduction
MeSH terms
Autogenic Training, Body Image, Breast Neoplasms, Female, Genital Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Hypnosis, Quality of Life, Treatment Outcome

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review