Gary Elkins

Dr. Gary Elkins

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

49Years (1978-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
3 November 2014 in International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GEGary Elkins
Gary Elkins
ABArreed F. Barabasz
Arreed F. Barabasz
JCJames R. Council
James R. Council
DSDavid Spiegel
David Spiegel
This article describes the history, rationale, and guidelines for developing a new definition of hypnosis by the Society of Psychological Hypnosis, Division 30 of the American Psychological Association. The definition was developed with the aim of being concise, heuristic, and allowing for alternative theories of the mechanisms (to be determined in empirical scientific study). The definition of hypnosis is presented as well as definitions of the following related terms: hypnotic induction, hypnotizability, and hypnotherapy. The implications for advancing research and practice are discussed. The definitions are presented within the article.

1 January 2019 in Journal of Evidence-Based Integrative Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
AJAlisa Johnson
Alisa Johnson
LRLynae Roberts
Lynae Roberts
GEGary Elkins
Gary Elkins
Menopause is associated with problematic symptoms, including hot flashes, sleep problems, mood disorders, sexual dysfunction, weight gain, and declines in cognitive functioning. Many women seek complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) for symptom management. This article critically reviews the existing literature on CAM treatments most commonly used for menopausal symptoms. Electronic searches were conducted to identify relevant, English-language literature published through March 2017. Results indicate that mind and body practices may be of benefit in reducing stress and bothersomeness of some menopausal symptoms. In particular, hypnosis is a mind-body intervention that has consistently shown to have a clinically significant effect on reducing hot flashes. Evidence is mixed in regard to the efficacy of natural products and there are some safety concerns. Health care providers should consider the evidence on CAM in providing an integrative health approach to menopausal symptom management.

7 April 2015 in American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GEGary Elkins
Gary Elkins
ABArreed F. Barabasz
Arreed F. Barabasz
JCJames R. Council
James R. Council
DSDavid Spiegel
David Spiegel
This article describes the history, rationale, and guidelines for developing a new definition of hypnosis by the Society of Psychological Hypnosis, Division 30 of the American Psychological Association. The definition was developed with the aim of being concise, being heuristic, and allowing for alternative theories of the mechanisms (to be determined in empirical scientific study). The definition of hypnosis is presented as well as definitions of the following related terms: hypnotic induction, hypnotizability, and hypnotherapy. The implications for advancing research and practice are discussed. The definitions are presented within the article.

1 November 2008 in Journal of Clinical Oncology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GEGary Elkins
Gary Elkins
JMJoel Marcus
Joel Marcus
VSVered Stearns
Vered Stearns
MPMichelle Perfect
Michelle Perfect
MRM. Hasan Rajab
M. Hasan Rajab
TKTimothy Keith
Timothy Keith
Purpose: Hot flashes are a significant problem for many breast cancer survivors. Hot flashes can cause discomfort, disrupted sleep, anxiety, and decreased quality of life. A well-tolerated and effective mind-body treatment for hot flashes would be of great value. On the basis of previous case studies, this study was developed to evaluate the effect of a hypnosis intervention for hot flashes. Patients and Methods: Sixty female breast cancer survivors with hot flashes were randomly assigned to receive hypnosis intervention (five weekly sessions) or no treatment. Eligible patients had to have a history of primary breast cancer without evidence of detectable disease and 14 or more weekly hot flashes for at least 1 month. The major outcome measure was a bivariate construct that represented hot flash frequency and hot flash score, which was analyzed by a classic sums and differences comparison. Secondary outcome measures were self-reports of interference of hot flashes on daily activities. Results: Fifty-one randomly assigned women completed the study. By the end of the treatment period, hot flash scores (frequency × average severity) decreased 68% from baseline to end point in the hypnosis arm (P < .001). Significant improvements in self-reported anxiety, depression, interference of hot flashes on daily activities, and sleep were observed for patients who received the hypnosis intervention (P < .005) in comparison to the no treatment control group. Conclusion: Hypnosis appears to reduce perceived hot flashes in breast cancer survivors and may have additional benefits such as reduced anxiety and depression, and improved sleep.

31 May 2007 in International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GEGary Elkins
Gary Elkins
MJMark P. Jensen
Mark P. Jensen
DPDavid R. Patterson
David R. Patterson
This article reviews controlled prospective trials of hypnosis for the treatment of chronic pain. Thirteen studies, excluding studies of headaches, were identified that compared outcomes from hypnosis for the treatment of chronic pain to either baseline data or a control condition. The findings indicate that hypnosis interventions consistently produce significant decreases in pain associated with a variety of chronic-pain problems. Also, hypnosis was generally found to be more effective than nonhypnotic interventions such as attention, physical therapy, and education. Most of the hypnosis interventions for chronic pain include instructions in self-hypnosis. However, there is a lack of standardization of the hypnotic interventions examined in clinical trials, and the number of patients enrolled in the studies has tended to be low and lacking long-term follow-up. Implications of the findings for future clinical research and applications are discussed.

1 March 2013 in Menopause
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GEGary Elkins
Gary Elkins
WFWilliam I. Fisher
William I. Fisher
AJAimee K. Johnson
Aimee K. Johnson
JCJanet S. Carpenter
Janet S. Carpenter
TKTimothy Z. Keith
Timothy Z. Keith
The use of estrogen and progesterone to manage vasomotor symptoms (ie, hot flashes and night sweats) has declined because of concerns about their risks, and there is an increased interest in alternate, effective, and low-risk treatments. This study reports the results of a randomized controlled trial of clinical hypnosis for treating vasomotor symptoms among postmenopausal women. This is a randomized, single-blind, controlled, clinical trial involving 187 postmenopausal women reporting a minimum of seven hot flashes per day (or at least 50 hot flashes a week) at baseline between December 2008 and April 2012. Eligible participants received five weekly sessions of either clinical hypnosis or structured-attention control. Primary outcomes were hot flash frequency (subjectively and physiologically recorded) and hot flash score assessed by daily diaries on weeks 2 to 6 and week 12. Secondary outcomes included measures of hot flash-related daily interference, sleep quality, and treatment satisfaction. In a modified intent-to-treat analysis that included all randomized participants who provided data, reported subjective hot flash frequency from baseline to week 12 showed a mean reduction of 55.82 (74.16%) hot flashes for the clinical hypnosis intervention versus a mean reduction of 12.89 (17.13%) hot flashes for controls (P < 0.001; 95% CI, 36.15-49.67). The mean reduction in hot flash score was 18.83 (80.32%) for the clinical hypnosis intervention as compared with 3.53 (15.38%) for controls (P < 0.001; 95% CI, 12.60-17.54). At 12-week follow-up, the mean reduction in physiologically monitored hot flashes was 5.92 (56.86%) for clinical hypnosis and 0.88 (9.94%) for controls (P < 0.001; 95% CI, 2.00-5.46). Secondary outcomes were significantly improved compared with controls at 12-week follow-up: hot flash-related interference (P < 0.001; 95% CI, 2.74-4.02), sleep quality (P < 0.001; 95% CI, 3.65-5.84), and treatment satisfaction (P < 0.001; 95% CI, 7.79-8.59). Compared with structured-attention control, clinical hypnosis results in significant reductions in self-reported and physiologically measured hot flashes and hot flash scores in postmenopausal women.