Hypnotic recall: a positive criterion in the differential diagnosis between XXXX and @entity410 .

@entity1 @entity2730 @entity410 @entity302
PURPOSE: Because the diagnosis of @entity410 ( @entity410 ) is mostly made by excluding @entity302 , availability of a positive criterion for @entity410 is of great importance. This study was aimed at the validation of a diagnostic technique that intends to provide in such a positive criterion. METHODS: In 17 @entity1 with @entity302 ( @entity302 ) and 20 @entity1 with @entity410 , a hypnotic procedure was performed by an investigator blind to other data to recover @entity2730 for the ictus. If recall was obtained, the experimental diagnosis PES was given; if not, ES was diagnosed. The experimental diagnoses were compared with the clinical, EEG-confirmed diagnoses. Hypnotizability was measured to determine the relation between the outcome of the test and hypnotizability of the @entity1 . RESULTS: Recall for the ictus was obtained in 17 @entity1 . Each of these had a clinical diagnosis of PES. Seventeen @entity1 with "no recall" had a clinical diagnosis of ES, and three @entity1 had @entity410 . This result yields a specificity of 100% and a sensitivity of 85% for the recall technique. Hypnotizability was significantly higher in @entity1 with @entity410 than in @entity1 with @entity302 . In some "low hypnotizables," recall was obtained, and in some "high hypnotizables," no recall was obtained. CONCLUSIONS: A positive recall test indicates PES. A sub-group of @entity1 with @entity410 is characterized by a high level of hypnotizability. Hypnotizability is not crucial for outcome of the recall test. High hypnotic abilities are especially found in disorders in which it is supposed that "dissociation" is involved. It can be speculated that PES may be one of the dissociative phenomena.
