Efficacy and Safety of IBS Digital Behavioral Treatment (EASITx)
Primary Purpose
Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Arm 1 - Active behavioral Treatment Arm (Regulora; Gut-Directed Hypnotherapy Software as a Medical Device - SaMD)
Arm 2 - Active Comparator behavioral treatment arm (MR-1; Muscle Relaxation, Software as a Medical Device - SaMD)
Sponsored by

About this trial
This is an interventional treatment trial for Irritable Bowel Syndrome focused on measuring IBS - Irritable Bowel Syndrome, IBS, Irritable Bowel
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- Provision of signed and dated informed consent form
- Stated willingness to comply with all study procedures and availability for the duration of the study
- Male or female, aged 18-70
- Confirmation of the IBS and IBS subtype diagnosis by a study site physician using Rome IV diagnostic criteria
- Possess an iPhone Operating System (iOS) Apple or Android smartphone or iOS tablet (iPad) released in 2015 or later
- Agreement to input information about their abdominal pain and bowel movements on a daily basis into Curebase software
- Agreement to have their anonymized data stored in the cloud for up to 2 years after the conclusion of the study, and to have the data used for research purposes.
- Agreement to maintain stable dosage of IBS medications during the course of treatment and not to add new IBS medication or stop current IBS medications unless directed to do so by the participants treating physician. Changes in treatment will be captured using a concomitant medication assessment.
- Average "Worst Daily Pain Severity" of >3 on a 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) over the full 28-day pre-treatment symptom tracking period
- Consistent submission of Pain Severity scores via the Curebase app (data submitted on 80% or more of days in the symptom tracking window)
Exclusion Criteria:
- Evidence of current structural intestinal abnormalities that better explain the participant's IBS symptoms (e.g., celiac disease, inflammatory bowel disease - Crohn's Disease and ulcerative colitis, prior abdominal surgeries such as weight loss surgery or bowel resection)
- Medication use, other illnesses or conditions that can explain their gastrointestinal symptoms e.g.,regular narcotic use or dependency, Over The Counter (OTC) stimulant laxative dependence (i.e, progressively larger doses of Senna or Bisacodyl containing compounds are needed to produce a bowel movement), history of radiation to the abdomen.
- Diagnosed and/or treated for a malignancy within the past 5 years (other than localized basal or squamous cell carcinomas of the skin)
- Current psychotherapy, hypnotherapy, or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for IBS
- Inability to commit to completing all treatment sessions
- Have an unstable extraintestinal condition whose immediate or foreseeable treatment needs would realistically interfere with study demands, e.g., ability to participate in online treatment sessions or follow daily diary.
- Active psychiatric disorder (e.g., post-traumatic stress disorder, depression associated with high risk of suicidal behavior, psychotic or delusional disorders, dissociative disorders, or gross cognitive impairment)
- Subjects that report a current gastrointestinal infection or an infection within the 4 weeks prior to the evaluation that would otherwise obscure IBS symptoms. In cases of gastrointestinal infection baseline evaluation will be delayed a minimum of 4 weeks until after complete recovery.
- Current or recent use of a gut-targeted antibiotic such as Neomycin or Rifaximin during the 12 weeks prior to baseline assessment. In the case of treatment with rifaximin or neomycin, eligibility will be suspended for 12 weeks from the initial date of use.
- Any condition that an investigator feels may interfere with the conduct of the study
Sites / Locations
- Curebase
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Active Comparator
Arm Label
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Description
Arm 1 is an active behavioral treatment for IBS (Regulora; Gut-Directed Hypnotherapy Software as a Medical Device - SaMD).
Arm 2 is a behavioral treatment (MR-1; Muscle Relaxation, Software as a Medical Device - SaMD)
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
Abdominal Pain Intensity Responder
The primary endpoint of this study is abdominal pain intensity. The Instrument is a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS, 0= no pain, 10= worst pain). The subject is asked daily to record their "worst abdominal pain over the past 24-hours".
An Abdominal Pain Intensity Responder is defined as a subject whose daily abdominal pain intensity averaged over the 4 weeks post-treatment (weeks 13 through 16) is at least 30% reduced compared to the daily abdominal pain intensity averaged over the 4 weeks pre-treatment (weeks -4 through -1).
Secondary Outcome Measures
Abdominal Pain Intensity
The Instrument is a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS, 0= no pain, 10= worst pain). The subject is asked daily to record their "worst abdominal pain over the past 24-hours". Mean change in reported abdominal pain intensity.
Abdominal Pain Frequency
Mean change in reported abdominal pain frequency. The abdominal pain frequency is based on the frequency of abdominal pain measured using a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS, 0= no pain, 10= worst pain). The subject is asked daily to record their "worst abdominal pain over the past 24-hours".
Average abdominal pain frequency is defined as the average number of days per week during the 4-week post-treatment assessment period in which the subjects recorded a 1 or greater on the daily pain measurement. Only days during which an assessment is recorded will be included in the calculation of average abdominal pain frequency. Days where severity was >0 were considered a day with pain and were recorded as positive. Days with a score of 0 were days without pain. Mean represents the mean number of days per week in each time period with abdominal pain. A lower score is a better outcome.
Number of Participants With >=30% Improvement in Normal Bowel Movements (Scored as 3, 4, or 5 on the Bristol Stool Form Scale)
Number of Participants with a ≥ 30% improvement in the proportion of Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS) scores that fell within Group 2 (normal stools) compared with baseline (Weeks -4 through -1). The result represents the number of participants with ≥ 30% improvement in the percentage of normal stools The BSFS is a visual aid that allows patients to classify their bowel movements into seven groups ranging from a score of 1 (separate hard lumps) to 7 (watery, no solid pieces). The BSFS scores will be grouped as 1,2 (Group 1), 3,4,5 (Group 2) and 6,7 (Group 3). The mid-range bowel movements 3,4 and 5 (Group 2) define normal stools.
Daily Stool Frequency
Mean change in reported daily stool frequency Analyses of change in daily stool frequency will only include participants with IBS-C and IBS-D. IBS-C and IBS-D subtypes will be analyzed independently.
Health-related Quality of Life Using the IBS Quality of Life (QOL) Instrument
The IBS QOL is a 34 item IBS-specific, validated instrument. The 34 items are summed for a total score and then transformed to 0-100 scale with higher scores indicating better IBS specific quality of life. IBS QOL scores will be compared pre- and post-treatment and the mean difference compared by treatment.
Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to IBS Based on the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire
Productivity and absenteeism will be evaluated using the patient reported Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) General Health score. The WPAI (Reilly 1993) is a 6-question survey of presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness) and absenteeism (work time missed).
The WPAI-GH consists of six questions: 1 = currently employed; 2 = hours missed due to health problems; 3 = hours missed other reasons; 4 = hours actually worked; 5 = degree health affected productivity while working (using a 0 to 10 Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)); 6 = degree health affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (VAS).
Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity (worse outcomes).
Percent Overall Activity Impairment Due to IBS Based on the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire
Productivity and absenteeism will be evaluated using the patient reported Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) General Health score. The WPAI (Reilly 1993) is a 6-question survey of presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness) and absenteeism (work time missed).
The WPAI-GH consists of six questions: 1 = currently employed; 2 = hours missed due to health problems; 3 = hours missed other reasons; 4 = hours actually worked; 5 = degree health affected productivity while working (using a 0 to 10 Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)); 6 = degree health affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (VAS). Overall activity impairment is based on responses to Question 6.
Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity (worse outcomes).
Full Information
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04133519
Brief Title
Efficacy and Safety of IBS Digital Behavioral Treatment
Acronym
EASITx
Official Title
The Efficacy and Safety of IBS Digital Behavioral Treatment Study
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
April 2022
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
October 23, 2019 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
October 28, 2020 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
October 26, 2021 (Actual)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
metaMe Health
4. Oversight
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
Yes
Device Product Not Approved or Cleared by U.S. FDA
Yes
Product Manufactured in and Exported from the U.S.
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Comparator-Controlled, Parallel-Group Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Two Self-administered behavioral treatments for Adult Subjects with Symptomatic Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS).
Detailed Description
EASITx is a pivotal study comparing two self-administered behavioral treatments for irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). The active treatment in EASITx is classified as Software as a Medical Device (SaaMD).
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Irritable Bowel Syndrome
Keywords
IBS - Irritable Bowel Syndrome, IBS, Irritable Bowel
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
A Randomized, Double-Blind, Comparator-Controlled, Parallel-Group Study
Masking
ParticipantCare ProviderInvestigator
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
378 (Actual)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
Arm 1
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Arm 1 is an active behavioral treatment for IBS (Regulora; Gut-Directed Hypnotherapy Software as a Medical Device - SaMD).
Arm Title
Arm 2
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Arm 2 is a behavioral treatment (MR-1; Muscle Relaxation, Software as a Medical Device - SaMD)
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Arm 1 - Active behavioral Treatment Arm (Regulora; Gut-Directed Hypnotherapy Software as a Medical Device - SaMD)
Intervention Description
The active treatment consists of 7 unique video/audio recordings administered via a mobile application every other week for 12 weeks (SaMD). Since subjects in both the active and comparator treatment arms receive a behavioral treatment, the subjects are blinded to active treatment.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Arm 2 - Active Comparator behavioral treatment arm (MR-1; Muscle Relaxation, Software as a Medical Device - SaMD)
Intervention Description
The comparator treatment consists of an identical treatment platform, scheduling platform, and reminder platform as the Active Treatment Arm, but in place of Gut-Directed Hypnotherapy there is a comparator relaxation treatment administered on an identical schedule: 7 unique video/audio recordings administered via a mobile application every other week for 12 weeks.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Abdominal Pain Intensity Responder
Description
The primary endpoint of this study is abdominal pain intensity. The Instrument is a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS, 0= no pain, 10= worst pain). The subject is asked daily to record their "worst abdominal pain over the past 24-hours".
An Abdominal Pain Intensity Responder is defined as a subject whose daily abdominal pain intensity averaged over the 4 weeks post-treatment (weeks 13 through 16) is at least 30% reduced compared to the daily abdominal pain intensity averaged over the 4 weeks pre-treatment (weeks -4 through -1).
Time Frame
Baseline score (average of daily score for weeks -4 through -1) was compared to 4-weeks post-treatment (average daily score for weeks 13 through 16)
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Abdominal Pain Intensity
Description
The Instrument is a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS, 0= no pain, 10= worst pain). The subject is asked daily to record their "worst abdominal pain over the past 24-hours". Mean change in reported abdominal pain intensity.
Time Frame
Baseline score (average of daily score for weeks -4 through -1) was compared to 4-weeks post-treatment (average daily score for weeks 13 through 16)
Title
Abdominal Pain Frequency
Description
Mean change in reported abdominal pain frequency. The abdominal pain frequency is based on the frequency of abdominal pain measured using a 0-10 numeric rating scale (NRS, 0= no pain, 10= worst pain). The subject is asked daily to record their "worst abdominal pain over the past 24-hours".
Average abdominal pain frequency is defined as the average number of days per week during the 4-week post-treatment assessment period in which the subjects recorded a 1 or greater on the daily pain measurement. Only days during which an assessment is recorded will be included in the calculation of average abdominal pain frequency. Days where severity was >0 were considered a day with pain and were recorded as positive. Days with a score of 0 were days without pain. Mean represents the mean number of days per week in each time period with abdominal pain. A lower score is a better outcome.
Time Frame
Change from baseline (weeks -4 to -1 before treatment) to 4-week post treatment period (Weeks 13-16)
Title
Number of Participants With >=30% Improvement in Normal Bowel Movements (Scored as 3, 4, or 5 on the Bristol Stool Form Scale)
Description
Number of Participants with a ≥ 30% improvement in the proportion of Bristol Stool Form Scale (BSFS) scores that fell within Group 2 (normal stools) compared with baseline (Weeks -4 through -1). The result represents the number of participants with ≥ 30% improvement in the percentage of normal stools The BSFS is a visual aid that allows patients to classify their bowel movements into seven groups ranging from a score of 1 (separate hard lumps) to 7 (watery, no solid pieces). The BSFS scores will be grouped as 1,2 (Group 1), 3,4,5 (Group 2) and 6,7 (Group 3). The mid-range bowel movements 3,4 and 5 (Group 2) define normal stools.
Time Frame
Baseline score (average of daily score for weeks -4 through -1) was compared to 4-weeks post-treatment (average daily score for weeks 13 through 16)
Title
Daily Stool Frequency
Description
Mean change in reported daily stool frequency Analyses of change in daily stool frequency will only include participants with IBS-C and IBS-D. IBS-C and IBS-D subtypes will be analyzed independently.
Time Frame
Baseline score (average of daily score for weeks -4 through -1) was compared to 4-weeks post-treatment (average daily score for weeks 13 through 16)
Title
Health-related Quality of Life Using the IBS Quality of Life (QOL) Instrument
Description
The IBS QOL is a 34 item IBS-specific, validated instrument. The 34 items are summed for a total score and then transformed to 0-100 scale with higher scores indicating better IBS specific quality of life. IBS QOL scores will be compared pre- and post-treatment and the mean difference compared by treatment.
Time Frame
Baseline (Week -4) to 4-weeks post-treatment (Week 16)
Title
Percent Overall Work Impairment Due to IBS Based on the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire
Description
Productivity and absenteeism will be evaluated using the patient reported Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) General Health score. The WPAI (Reilly 1993) is a 6-question survey of presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness) and absenteeism (work time missed).
The WPAI-GH consists of six questions: 1 = currently employed; 2 = hours missed due to health problems; 3 = hours missed other reasons; 4 = hours actually worked; 5 = degree health affected productivity while working (using a 0 to 10 Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)); 6 = degree health affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (VAS).
Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity (worse outcomes).
Time Frame
Baseline (Week -4) to 4-weeks post-treatment (Week 16)
Title
Percent Overall Activity Impairment Due to IBS Based on the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) Questionnaire
Description
Productivity and absenteeism will be evaluated using the patient reported Work Productivity and Activity Impairment (WPAI) General Health score. The WPAI (Reilly 1993) is a 6-question survey of presenteeism (impairment at work / reduced on-the-job effectiveness) and absenteeism (work time missed).
The WPAI-GH consists of six questions: 1 = currently employed; 2 = hours missed due to health problems; 3 = hours missed other reasons; 4 = hours actually worked; 5 = degree health affected productivity while working (using a 0 to 10 Visual Analogue Scale (VAS)); 6 = degree health affected productivity in regular unpaid activities (VAS). Overall activity impairment is based on responses to Question 6.
Outcomes are expressed as impairment percentages (0-100%) with higher numbers indicating greater impairment and less productivity (worse outcomes).
Time Frame
4-weeks post-treatment (Week 16)
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
70 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Provision of signed and dated informed consent form
Stated willingness to comply with all study procedures and availability for the duration of the study
Male or female, aged 18-70
Confirmation of the IBS and IBS subtype diagnosis by a study site physician using Rome IV diagnostic criteria
Possess an iPhone Operating System (iOS) Apple or Android smartphone or iOS tablet (iPad) released in 2015 or later
Agreement to input information about their abdominal pain and bowel movements on a daily basis into Curebase software
Agreement to have their anonymized data stored in the cloud for up to 2 years after the conclusion of the study, and to have the data used for research purposes.
Agreement to maintain stable dosage of IBS medications during the course of treatment and not to add new IBS medication or stop current IBS medications unless directed to do so by the participants treating physician. Changes in treatment will be captured using a concomitant medication assessment.
Average "Worst Daily Pain Severity" of >3 on a 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) over the full 28-day pre-treatment symptom tracking period
Consistent submission of Pain Severity scores via the Curebase app (data submitted on 80% or more of days in the symptom tracking window)
Exclusion Criteria:
Evidence of current structural intestinal abnormalities that better explain the participant's IBS symptoms (e.g., celiac disease, inflammatory bowel disease - Crohn's Disease and ulcerative colitis, prior abdominal surgeries such as weight loss surgery or bowel resection)
Medication use, other illnesses or conditions that can explain their gastrointestinal symptoms e.g.,regular narcotic use or dependency, Over The Counter (OTC) stimulant laxative dependence (i.e, progressively larger doses of Senna or Bisacodyl containing compounds are needed to produce a bowel movement), history of radiation to the abdomen.
Diagnosed and/or treated for a malignancy within the past 5 years (other than localized basal or squamous cell carcinomas of the skin)
Current psychotherapy, hypnotherapy, or cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for IBS
Inability to commit to completing all treatment sessions
Have an unstable extraintestinal condition whose immediate or foreseeable treatment needs would realistically interfere with study demands, e.g., ability to participate in online treatment sessions or follow daily diary.
Active psychiatric disorder (e.g., post-traumatic stress disorder, depression associated with high risk of suicidal behavior, psychotic or delusional disorders, dissociative disorders, or gross cognitive impairment)
Subjects that report a current gastrointestinal infection or an infection within the 4 weeks prior to the evaluation that would otherwise obscure IBS symptoms. In cases of gastrointestinal infection baseline evaluation will be delayed a minimum of 4 weeks until after complete recovery.
Current or recent use of a gut-targeted antibiotic such as Neomycin or Rifaximin during the 12 weeks prior to baseline assessment. In the case of treatment with rifaximin or neomycin, eligibility will be suspended for 12 weeks from the initial date of use.
Any condition that an investigator feels may interfere with the conduct of the study
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Lucy Pun, DO
Organizational Affiliation
Elevated Health
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Curebase
City
San Francisco
State/Province
California
ZIP/Postal Code
94122
Country
United States
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
12775997
Citation
El-Serag HB. Impact of irritable bowel syndrome: prevalence and effect on health-related quality of life. Rev Gastroenterol Disord. 2003;3 Suppl 2:S3-11.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23994201
Citation
Ford AC, Bercik P, Morgan DG, Bolino C, Pintos-Sanchez MI, Moayyedi P. Validation of the Rome III criteria for the diagnosis of irritable bowel syndrome in secondary care. Gastroenterology. 2013 Dec;145(6):1262-70.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2013.08.048. Epub 2013 Aug 28.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12719202
Citation
Leong SA, Barghout V, Birnbaum HG, Thibeault CE, Ben-Hamadi R, Frech F, Ofman JJ. The economic consequences of irritable bowel syndrome: a US employer perspective. Arch Intern Med. 2003 Apr 28;163(8):929-35. doi: 10.1001/archinte.163.8.929.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22426087
Citation
Lovell RM, Ford AC. Global prevalence of and risk factors for irritable bowel syndrome: a meta-analysis. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2012 Jul;10(7):712-721.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2012.02.029. Epub 2012 Mar 15.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21090962
Citation
Mayer EA, Tillisch K. The brain-gut axis in abdominal pain syndromes. Annu Rev Med. 2011;62:381-96. doi: 10.1146/annurev-med-012309-103958.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Lackner JM. The role of psychosocial factors in functional gastrointestinal disorders. Quigley, Hongo, Fukuda (eds): Functional and GI Motility Disorders. 2014(33):104-16.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
27116612
Citation
Lacy BE, Patel H, Guerin A, Dea K, Scopel JL, Alaghband R, Wu EQ, Mody R. Variation in Care for Patients with Irritable Bowel Syndrome in the United States. PLoS One. 2016 Apr 26;11(4):e0154258. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154258. eCollection 2016.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
8218507
Citation
Blanchard EB, Greene B, Scharff L, Schwarz-McMorris SP. Relaxation training as a treatment for irritable bowel syndrome. Biofeedback Self Regul. 1993 Sep;18(3):125-32. doi: 10.1007/BF00999789.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26264539
Citation
Palsson OS. Hypnosis Treatment of Gastrointestinal Disorders: A Comprehensive Review of the Empirical Evidence. Am J Clin Hypn. 2015 Oct;58(2):134-58. doi: 10.1080/00029157.2015.1039114.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
29702118
Citation
Lackner JM, Jaccard J, Keefer L, Brenner DM, Firth RS, Gudleski GD, Hamilton FA, Katz LA, Krasner SS, Ma CX, Radziwon CD, Sitrin MD. Improvement in Gastrointestinal Symptoms After Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Refractory Irritable Bowel Syndrome. Gastroenterology. 2018 Jul;155(1):47-57. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.03.063. Epub 2018 Apr 25. Erratum In: Gastroenterology. 2018 Oct;155(4):1281.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
30473202
Citation
Flik CE, Laan W, Zuithoff NPA, van Rood YR, Smout AJPM, Weusten BLAM, Whorwell PJ, de Wit NJ. Efficacy of individual and group hypnotherapy in irritable bowel syndrome (IMAGINE): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Jan;4(1):20-31. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(18)30310-8. Epub 2018 Nov 23.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12454866
Citation
Drossman DA, Camilleri M, Mayer EA, Whitehead WE. AGA technical review on irritable bowel syndrome. Gastroenterology. 2002 Dec;123(6):2108-31. doi: 10.1053/gast.2002.37095. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25267941
Citation
Yeh VM, Schnur JB, Montgomery GH. Disseminating hypnosis to health care settings: Applying the RE-AIM framework. Psychol Conscious (Wash D C). 2014 Jun;1(2):213-228. doi: 10.1037/cns0000012.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
14570733
Citation
Gonsalkorale WM, Miller V, Afzal A, Whorwell PJ. Long term benefits of hypnotherapy for irritable bowel syndrome. Gut. 2003 Nov;52(11):1623-9. doi: 10.1136/gut.52.11.1623.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23617618
Citation
Lowen MB, Mayer EA, Sjoberg M, Tillisch K, Naliboff B, Labus J, Lundberg P, Strom M, Engstrom M, Walter SA. Effect of hypnotherapy and educational intervention on brain response to visceral stimulus in the irritable bowel syndrome. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2013 Jun;37(12):1184-97. doi: 10.1111/apt.12319. Epub 2013 Apr 25.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
10584162
Citation
Powell RA, Gee TL. The effects of hypnosis on dissociative identity disorder: a reexamination of the evidence. Can J Psychiatry. 1999 Nov;44(9):914-6. doi: 10.1177/070674379904400908.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19711767
Citation
Meyerson J, Konichezy A. Out-of-illness experience: hypnotically induced dissociation as a therapeutic resource in treating people with obstinate mental disorders. Am J Psychother. 2009;63(2):133-46. doi: 10.1176/appi.psychotherapy.2009.63.2.133. Erratum In: Am J Psychother. 2009;63(4):383. Myerson, Joseph [corrected to Meyerson, Joseph].
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
27173407
Citation
Hauser W, Hagl M, Schmierer A, Hansen E. The Efficacy, Safety and Applications of Medical Hypnosis. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2016 Apr 29;113(17):289-96. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2016.0289.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9512138
Citation
Patrick DL, Drossman DA, Frederick IO, DiCesare J, Puder KL. Quality of life in persons with irritable bowel syndrome: development and validation of a new measure. Dig Dis Sci. 1998 Feb;43(2):400-11. doi: 10.1023/a:1018831127942.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
10146874
Citation
Reilly MC, Zbrozek AS, Dukes EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. Pharmacoeconomics. 1993 Nov;4(5):353-65. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199304050-00006.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19996233
Citation
Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB, Lowe B. An ultra-brief screening scale for anxiety and depression: the PHQ-4. Psychosomatics. 2009 Nov-Dec;50(6):613-21. doi: 10.1176/appi.psy.50.6.613.
Results Reference
background
Citation
Bang H, Flaherty SP, Kolahi J, Park J. Blinding assessment in clinical trials: A review of statistical methods and a proposal of blinding assessment protocol. Clin Res and Reg Affairs, 2010;27(2):42-51
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
30728719
Citation
Williamson A. What is hypnosis and how might it work? Palliat Care. 2019 Jan 31;12:1178224219826581. doi: 10.1177/1178224219826581. eCollection 2019. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16316883
Citation
Palsson OS. Standardized hypnosis treatment for irritable bowel syndrome: the North Carolina protocol. Int J Clin Exp Hypn. 2006 Jan;54(1):51-64. doi: 10.1080/00207140500322933.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9299672
Citation
Lewis SJ, Heaton KW. Stool form scale as a useful guide to intestinal transit time. Scand J Gastroenterol. 1997 Sep;32(9):920-4. doi: 10.3109/00365529709011203.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22068664
Citation
Palsson OS, Baggish JS, Turner MJ, Whitehead WE. IBS patients show frequent fluctuations between loose/watery and hard/lumpy stools: implications for treatment. Am J Gastroenterol. 2012 Feb;107(2):286-95. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2011.358. Epub 2011 Nov 8.
Results Reference
background
Learn more about this trial
Efficacy and Safety of IBS Digital Behavioral Treatment
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs