The Benefits of Hypnosis Support in Stress Management for First-Year Students at the Higher Institute of Nursing and Health Techniques, Rabat

Abstract

The transition from secondary to higher education presents numerous academic, social, and psychological challenges that can negatively impact students’ well-being, particularly during the first year. This randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of hypnosis as a non-pharmacological intervention for managing perceived stress among first-year nursing students at the Higher Institute of Nursing and Health Techniques (ISPITS) in Rabat, Morocco. A total of 166 students from five academic tracks were randomly assigned to intervention and control groups with comparable baseline characteristics. Their perceived stress levels were assessed using two validated instruments, the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and the 14-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-14), administered before and after a five-session hypnosis program conducted over 10 weeks. The results showed a marked and statistically significant reduction in stress among the intervention group, with the mean VAS scores decreasing from 7.82 ± 2.05 to 3.00 ± 1.71 compared to a smaller reduction in the control group (from 7.65 ± 1.78 to 5.80 ± 1.72; between-group difference = 2.8, p < 0.0001). Similarly, the PSS-14 scores in the intervention group declined significantly from 26.42 ± 7.54 (moderate stress) to 24.32 ± 8.20 (still moderate), with a mean difference of 2.09 ± 7.70 (t = 2.21, p = 0.0307, 95% CI [0.20; 3.98]). These findings indicate that hypnosis is an effective mind–body approach for alleviating perceived stress, improving emotional regulation, and could be incorporated into academic support programs to enhance student well-being.

1. Introduction

The transition from secondary to higher education is a pivotal stage in a student’s academic journey, often accompanied by substantial academic, social, and psychological challenges [1,2].

Students’ psychological distress can manifest in various forms, including depression, anxiety, and sleep disorders. University students are exposed to high levels of stress due to academic pressures, financial concerns, and challenges related to adaptation [3,4]. Another study explores the relationship between academic stress and mental well-being among university students. The findings reveal that academic stress is significantly associated with a decline in mental well-being with variations related to gender and other socio-economic factors [5]. Stress is also associated with a range of health problems, including psychological distress, substance abuse, and eating disorders [6,7].

The well-being of first-year students has a significant influence on their academic success and motivation throughout their university education. Several studies have investigated student well-being using various assessment criteria, including stress and anxiety [8], self-esteem [9], sleep quality [8] and motivation [10]. An additional observational study reported that 67.5% of student midwives experienced at least mild depression, and 78.33% reported feeling stressed since the beginning of their training [11].

Longitudinal studies conducted among Chinese students reveal a negative bidirectional relationship between perceived stress and self-esteem (or self-efficacy); elevated stress levels undermine individuals’ confidence in their abilities, while low self-esteem increases susceptibility to stress. This reciprocal dynamic underscores the necessity of targeted interventions that address both stress management and the enhancement of self-esteem. Consistent institutional support—combining psychological counseling and educational strategies—is therefore essential to safeguarding students’ mental health and fostering their academic success [9,12].

In Morocco, a cross-sectional study was conducted between February and May 2018 among students at ISPTS Fez, with the objective of assessing the association between perceived stress and academic performance. According to the findings, the overall prevalence of stress was 17%, with first-year students experiencing 66% higher stress levels compared to their second-year counterparts [13].

Some emotional regulation strategies provide effective support for managing anxiety during high-stress situations [14,15]. Accordingly, a study by Saleh et al. (2017) [16] found that stress management strategies implemented through internet-based self-help tools enabled students to better understand and regulate their stress. This, in turn, reduced the risk of experiencing prolonged periods of anxiety during their academic journey and helped them cope more effectively with stress. In the same vein, another randomized controlled trial evaluated the effectiveness of an internet-based stress management intervention delivered via a mobile application for university students experiencing elevated stress levels. The findings demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in perceived stress among participants in the intervention group compared to those in the control group [17].

Mind–body interventions, including hypnosis, meditation, and relaxation, have been empirically evaluated for their potential to promote student well-being, with most studies reporting consistently positive outcomes [8]. Hypnosis, in particular, has demonstrated effectiveness in reducing stress and anxiety across various populations [8]. Several studies have highlighted the importance of hypnosis in supporting student well-being. A quasi-experimental study involving 100 first-year medical students in India evaluated the feasibility and effectiveness of a comprehensive stress management program. The intervention, which incorporated techniques such as relaxation, deep breathing, and visualization, was delivered by a psychiatrist and a nurse. After three months, the participants showed significant improvements in their perceived stress levels, emotional exhaustion, and emotion-focused coping strategies. The majority of students provided positive feedback, reinforcing both the feasibility and the effectiveness of the program [18]. A study by Hammer and colleagues (2022) specifically emphasized the need to manage exam-related anxiety, which can negatively affect academic performance and increase the risk of failure. According to the authors, hypnosis, considered a beneficial brief therapy, helped students reduce their exam-related anxiety, demonstrating a significant decrease in the overall anxiety scores. This therapeutic approach has been recognized as a promising strategy for alleviating the adverse effects of anxiety among university students [19].

In the context of education, hypnosis can be viewed as a form of cognitive behavioral therapy that addresses the evolving demands and challenges encountered within academic environments. It promotes a renewed relationship between a teacher and a learner, grounded in a tailored and effective communicative approach. By guiding the student into an altered state of consciousness, hypnosis enhances the attention and receptivity conditions that are conducive to learning and introspection. The objective is to induce a shift in perception by engaging the student’s imagination and sensory experience.

In this context, the present study aims to evaluate the effect of hypnosis on perceived stress levels among first-year nursing students at the ISPITS, Rabat.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design

This study is a randomized controlled intervention trial conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of hypnosis coaching sessions in reducing perceived stress levels among first-year nursing students at the Higher Institute of Nursing and Health Sciences (ISPITS) in Rabat, Morocco. The trial was stratified by academic discipline, with simple random allocation performed within each stratum.

2.2. Target Population and Participant Allocation

The target population comprised 166 first-year students from five academic tracks at the ISPITS, Rabat. Within each track, students were randomly assigned—by simple drawing of lots—to one of two groups (

Table 1. Distribution of target population (control and intervention groups).

	Total Sample Size (N)	Sample Size of the Control Group	Sample Size of the Intervention Group
Track 1: Environmental Health Technician	30	15	15
Track 2: Psychomotor Therapist	36	18	18
Track 3: Occupational Therapist	30	15	15
Track 4: Dietitians and Nutritionists	30	15	15
Track 5: Nurse Anesthetists	40	20	20
Total Sample Size (N)	166	83	83

):

• An intervention group, which received hypnosis sessions delivered over 10 weeks;
• A control group, which received no specific intervention.

Before randomization, students who did not meet the inclusion criteria were excluded. Exclusion criteria were: non-validation of both semesters in the 2022–2023 academic year; re-enrollment in 2023–2024; foreign or military status; current psychiatric or psychological follow-up; and ongoing treatment with psychotropic medication.

At the baseline, the two groups were comparable in terms of academic discipline, average age, baccalaureate grades, and socio-economic background, ensuring homogeneity and minimizing potential confounding factors.

2.3. Intervention

The intervention group participated in five standardized hypnosis sessions, each lasting 60 min, delivered over a 10-week period by a trained and experienced hypnotherapist, ensuring consistency and adherence to the intervention protocol. These sessions were conducted concurrently with the students’ regular academic activities. In contrast, the control group did not receive any specific intervention and continued their academic program as usual.

2.4. Measurement Scales

Both the groups (control group and intervention group) completed the same validated self-report questionnaires at two time points:

• T0 (baseline = pre-intervention);
• T1 (post-intervention).

Furthermore, to assess baseline equivalence, we performed an independent samples t-test comparing the pre-intervention (T0) stress scores between the hypnosis and control groups for both the assessment tools.

The instruments employed for data collection were as follows:

• The Visual Analog Scale for Stress (VAS), a 10 cm horizontal line representing stress intensity from “no stress” to “maximum imaginable stress”. The students marked the point that best reflected their stress level, and the distance from the zero point was used as a quantitative score.
• The 14-item Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-14) was developed by Cohen et al. and has been translated and validated in French [20] and Arabic [21]. The PSS-14 assesses perceived stress over the past month using 14 items rated on a 5-point Likert scale (0 = “Never” to 4 = “Very often”). Total scores < 18 indicate low stress, whereas scores > 38 indicate high stress. In this study, internal consistency was acceptable (Cronbach’s α = 0.76).

2.5. Structure of the Hypnosis Sessions

The purpose of hypnosis-based coaching is to mobilize students’ psychological resources to enhance learning strategies, manage stress, and strengthen self-esteem. When used outside formal therapeutic settings, hypnosis facilitates access to the unconscious mind, while reducing psychological resistance. This approach supports the exploration of individual difficulties, the alignment of personal and academic aspirations, and the promotion of overall well-being. It also encourages the activation of latent abilities, including both conscious and unconscious memory, as well as underutilized learning capacities. The coaching program consists of five sessions held at two-week intervals [19,22,23,24,25].

• The first session is devoted to introducing hypnosis, outlining its key characteristics, the typical stages of a session, and the concept of hypnotic trance. It begins with a preliminary discussion designed to explore the participants’ expectations, attitudes, and prior experiences, as well as to identify their perceptions and detect any potential contraindications to hypnosis. This initial exchange is followed by the establishment of a therapeutic alliance, fostering trust and collaboration between the practitioner and the participant. The session concludes with a cardiac coherence exercise, offering the participants an initial experience of relaxation and promoting a sense of connection and self-regulation.
• Second, Third, Fourth, and Fifth Session During the second, third, fourth, and fifth sessions, the standard stages of a hypnosis session were systematically followed, including induction, suggestions, awakening, and debriefing.

✓

Induction: Each session begins by welcoming the students and ensuring they are physically and psychologically comfortable. Contextually adapted hypnotic induction is then conducted to facilitate a state of relaxation and focused attention. This induction incorporates the free exploration of visual sensations, specifically designed to stimulate creativity and prime the mind to receive therapeutic suggestions effectively.

✓

Suggestions: Students are guided to recall a past experience associated with personal success, with the aim of eliciting positive emotions and physiological responses. This reflective process serves as an anchor to reinforce self-esteem and enable participants to draw upon their internal resources. Subsequently, a structured mental projection exercise encourages them to anticipate potentially stressful future situations—such as examinations or academic challenges—while simultaneously mobilizing these internal resources to regulate negative emotions and foster a sense of preparedness and confidence.

Through the use of evocative metaphors such as the “balloon” technique, students learn to gradually release emotional tension and envision positive mental transformations. This process concludes with the reframing of an imagined ideal into a realistic and achievable goal, supported by suggestions that reinforce their abilities and promote constructive, success-oriented thinking.

✓

Awakening: The return to wakefulness is gradual and structured. It relies on multisensory techniques, engaging the five senses, auditory (hearing), visual (imagery), kinesthetic (touch and movement), olfactory (smell), and gustatory (taste), with a particular emphasis on auditory and visual stimuli. A specific physical gesture is introduced to anchor internal resources, enabling students to retain and reactivate the benefits of the session.

✓

Debriefing: The session concludes with a debriefing phase, during which students are invited to share their impressions and reflect on their hypnotic experience. The hypnotherapist supports them in recognizing their capacity to influence their internal states, behaviors, and surrounding environment.

2.6. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS Statistics software, version 30 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). The normality of PSS-14 scores was verified with the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test, appropriate for sample sizes exceeding 30 participants per group.

Descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) were computed for both the PSS-14 and VAS scores. For the VAS, paired samples t-tests were applied to assess within academic track changes (T0 vs. T1) in both the intervention and control groups, while independent samples t-tests were conducted to compare the baseline (T0) and post-treatment (T1) scores between the groups across all the academic tracks.

For PSS-14, paired samples t-tests were performed to evaluate the pre- and post-hypnosis changes (T0 vs. T1) within each group (intervention and control). Additionally, an independent samples t-test was used to compare the post-treatment PSS-14 scores between the intervention and control groups, providing an overall measure of the intervention’s impact on perceived stress across all the participants.

The significance threshold was set at p < 0.05 (α = 5%) for all statistical tests. This combined approach allowed for a rigorous assessment of both within-group improvements and between-group differences, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation of the effectiveness of the hypnosis intervention.

2.7. Ethical Considerations

Informed consent was duly obtained from all the participating students, along with approval from the Ethics Committee for Biomedical Research (CERB) of the Faculty of Medicine and Pharmacy of Tangier, under reference number AC80JT/2024. All the necessary authorizations were also secured. Furthermore, the confidentiality of the data and the anonymity of the participants were strictly upheld throughout this study.

In addition, strict adherence to the ethical principles governing all forms of therapy, including hypnosis, was fully ensured, with particular emphasis on maintaining the confidentiality of the personal data and guaranteeing each participant the right to withdraw from this study at any time without any repercussions [24,26,27,28].

3. Results

3.1. VAS Score Results (Inter- and Intra-Group)

The impact of hypnosis on the stress levels among first-year nursing students was initially assessed using the Visual Analog Scale for Stress (VAS), with the results presented in

Table 2. VAS stress score comparisons between and within groups at baseline and post-treatment.

University Track	Comparison Group	Timepoint	Mean ± SD	Difference in Means (T0–T1:10)	Mean T0 Intervention–Mean T0 Control	Mean T1:10 Intervention–Mean T1:10 Control	Paired Samples t-Test	p-Value (from Paired Samples t-Test)	Critical Value	IC (95%)	Independent Samples t-Test	p-Value (from Independent Samples t-Test)	Critical Value	IC (95%)
Baseline Comparison (All tracks Combined)	Control Group	T0	7.63 ± 1.78	-	0.25	-	-	-	-	-	0.85	0.4	1.97	[−0.33; 0.84]
	Intervention Group		7.89 ± 2.05
Track 1: Environmental Health Technician	Control Group	T0	8.29 ± 1.38	1.88	-	-	3.37	0.005	2.14	[0.6; 2.73]	−4.93	0.0000 ***	2.05	[−4.62; −1.91]
		T1	6.41 ± 1.8
	Intervention Group	T0	8.27 ± 2.31	5.14	-	-	7.76	0.0000 ***	2.14	[3.28; 5.79]
		T1	3.13 ± 1.74
Track 2: Psychomotricity	Control Group	T0	8.06 ± 1.30	2.50	-	-	7.91	0.0000 ***	2.11	[1.83; 3.17]	−4.43	0.0000 ***	2.03	[−3.48; −1.29]
		T1	5.56 ± 1.15
	Intervention Group	T0	7.47 ± 2.65	4.29	-	-	7.69	0.0000 ***	2.11	[2.94; 5.17]
		T1	3.18 ± 1.98
Track 3: Occupational Therapy	Control Group	T0	7.76 ± 1.74	1.76	-	-	6.5	0.0000 ***	2.14	[1.16; 2.30]	−4.88	0.0003 ***	2.04	[−3.69; −1.51]
		T1	6.00 ± 1.51
	Intervention Group	T0	7.47 ± 1.46	3.78	-	-	8.9	0.0000 ***	2.14	[2.83; 4.63]
		T1	3.18 ± 1.50
Track 4: Dietetics and Nutrition	Control Group	T0	7.38 ± 2.09	1.81	-	-	3.36	0.005	2.14	[0.65; 2.95]	−2.34	0.02	2.05	[−2.3; 0.20]
		T1	5.56 ± 2.00
	Intervention Group	T0	7.56 ± 1.70	3.78	-	-	9.13	0.0000 ***	2.14	[2.91; 4.69]
		T1	3.78 ± 1.83
Track 5: Anesthesia	Control Group	T0	7.40 ± 2.28	1.85	-	-	4.61	0.0002 ***	2.09	[0.85; 2.25]	−3.89	0.0004 ***	2.02	[−3.42; −1.08]
		T1	5.55 ± 1.98
	Intervention Group	T0	9.45 ± 0.86	5.50	-	-	15.36	0.0000 ***	2.09	[5.22; 6.87]
		T1	3.95 ± 1.78
Post-Treatment Comparison (All Tracks Combined)	Control Group	T1	5.78 ± 1.72	-	-	2.4	-	-	-	-	−9.06	0.0000 ***	1.97	[−2.93; −1.88]
	Intervention Group		3.37 ± 1.71

*** p < 0.001 (highly significant).

. This table shows the evolution of the VAS in both the intervention and control groups across the five academic tracks before (T0) and after (T1) the hypnosis intervention.

To ensure baseline comparability between the intervention and control groups, an independent samples t-test was performed on the VAS scores at T0 (prior to the intervention). The analysis included all the participants (N = 166) and revealed no statistically significant difference between the groups (mean difference = 0.16; p = 0.40; see Table 2). This confirms that both the groups were equivalent in stress levels before the intervention, supporting the internal validity of the subsequent comparisons.

We then compared the VAS stress scores of the intervention and control groups within each university track. As shown in Table 2, the evolution of VAS scores from T0 to T1 highlights a marked reduction in stress levels in the intervention group, whereas the control group exhibited minimal or no change. The p-values for the comparisons between the intervention and control groups at T1 indicate statistically significant differences, particularly where the stress levels dropped more sharply in the intervention groups.

Given the consistency of results across the five academic tracks, we aggregated the data to compare the overall post-treatment stress levels. As shown in Table 2, the intervention group reported a significantly lower mean VAS score at T1 (3.37 ± 1.71) compared to the control group (5.78 ± 1.72), with a mean difference of 2.4 points. An independent samples t-test confirmed that this difference was highly significant (t = −9.06; p < 0.0001; 95% CI [−2.93; −1.88]), providing strong evidence for the effectiveness of hypnosis in reducing perceived stress.

Track-level analyses reinforced this finding.

Track 1 (Environmental Health): The VAS scores decreased from 8.27 ± 2.31 to 3.13 ± 1.74 in the intervention group compared to a smaller decrease from 8.29 ± 1.38 to 6.41 ± 1.80 in the control group (t = −4.93; p < 0.0000; 95% CI [−4.62; −1.91]).

Track 2 (Psychomotricity): The intervention group’s score decreased from 7.47 ± 2.65 to 3.18 ± 1.98, whereas the control group’s score decreased from 8.06 ± 1.30 to 5.56 ± 1.15 (t = −4.43; p < 0.0000; 95% CI [−3.48; −1.29]).

Track 3 (Occupational Therapy): A significant difference was observed at T1 (t = −4.88; p = 0.0003; 95% CI [−3.69; −1.51]), confirming a greater reduction in stress in the intervention group.

Track 4 (Dietetics and Nutrition): A moderate, but significant difference was found at T1 (t = −2.34; p = 0.02; 95% CI [−2.30; −0.20]).

Track 5 (Anesthesia): A clear reduction in stress was also observed (t = −3.89; p = 0.0004; 95% CI [−3.42; −1.08]).

Across all the tracks, the 95% confidence intervals are entirely negative, indicating consistently lower post-treatment stress levels in the intervention group compared to the control group. These converging results, both within and across tracks, provide robust statistical evidence of the effectiveness of hypnosis in reducing perceived stress among students.

3.2. Effect of the Hypnosis Intervention on Perceived Stress (PSS-14 Scores and Statistical Analysis)

For the intervention group, the mean PSS-14 score decreased from 26.42 ± 7.54 (moderate stress category) to 24.32 ± 8.20 (still within the moderate stress category, but closer to the lower end). The paired samples t-test showed a mean difference of 2.09 ± 7.70, with t = 2.21 and a critical value of 2.0. The p-value (p = 0.0307) is below the 0.05 threshold, indicating that this reduction is statistically significant. Moreover, the 95% confidence interval (0.20–3.98) does not include zero, reinforcing the reliability of this result (

Table 3. The PSS-14 scores for both the control and intervention groups before (T0) and after (T1) the hypnosis sessions, with all the academic tracks combined.

Comparison (All Tracks Combined)	Comparison Group	Timepoint	PSS-14 Mean ± SD	Stress Category	Mean Difference ± SD	t	Critical Value	p-Value	IC (95%)
Comparison (All tracks Combined)	Control Group	T0	26.13 ± 6.86	Moderate stress	0.33 ± 6.50	0.45	2.0	0.65	−0.95–1.61
		T1	25.80 ± 5.50	Moderate stress
	Intervention Group	T0	26.42 ± 7.54	Moderate stress	2.09 ± 7.70	2.21	2.0	0.030746	0.2–3.98
		T1	24.32 ± 8.20	Moderate stress

).

In contrast, the control group showed only a minimal and non-significant change, with the scores shifting slightly from 26.13 ± 6.86 (moderate stress category) to 25.80 ± 5.50 (still moderate stress). The mean difference of 0.33 ± 6.50 (t = 0.45, p = 0.65) and the 95% confidence interval (−0.95–1.61), which includes zero, confirm that no meaningful change occurred in the control group (Table 3).

These results, combined with the consistent findings from the VAS scores, provide strong evidence that the reduction in perceived stress can be attributed to the hypnosis intervention rather than to external factors or chance.

3.3. Graphical Presentation of Results

The dominance diagram provides a visual representation of the relationship between the pre- and post-intervention stress scores. Each point on the graph corresponds to an individual or a data set. The x-axis shows the pre-intervention stress scores, while the y-axis shows the post-intervention stress scores (Figure 1).

The points are aligned mainly along the upper left diagonal, suggesting a decrease in stress levels after the intervention (Figure 1). Indeed, if the post-intervention scores were identical to those before, the points would be exactly aligned along this diagonal. However, the majority of points appear to lie below this diagonal, indicating a reduction in post-intervention stress.

Figure 2 displays a boxplot of the VAS stress scores before and after the hypnosis intervention. The graph shows a clear decrease in scores following the sessions, with the post-intervention median and the interquartile range shifted downward compared to the pre-intervention values. The overall distribution appears more compact, with lower central tendency and fewer extreme values, reflecting a consistent reduction in stress levels among the participants. This visual representation supports the statistical findings and highlights the effectiveness of hypnosis in lowering perceived stress.

4. Discussion

University studies, particularly during the first year, represent a significant source of stress for students [29]. First-year university students often display more psychological difficulties than their peers of the same age. Regardless of the measurement scale used, our study showed that students at the ISPITS, Rabat, experience elevated levels of stress, as reflected by baseline average scores of 7.82 ± 2.05 on the VAS scale and 26.42 ± 7.54 on the PSS-14, both indicative of a substantial stress burden. After five hypnosis coaching sessions, the intervention group exhibited a marked and statistically significant reduction in stress, with an average decrease of 4.8 points on the VAS (from 7.82 ± 2.05 to 3.00 ± 1.71; p < 0.0001) and 2.1 points on the PSS-14 (from 26.42 ± 7.54 to 24.32 ± 8.20; p = 0.0307). In contrast, the control group showed only a modest, non-significant decline (VAS: from 7.65 ± 1.78 to 5.80 ± 1.72; PSS-14: from 26.13 ± 6.86 to 25.80 ± 5.50). Intergroup comparisons confirmed statistically significant differences in favor of the hypnosis intervention, with a 2.4-point difference on the VAS (p < 0.0001). These results strongly suggest that hypnosis is an effective mind–body approach for reducing perceived stress and enhancing emotional regulation among students.

These findings are consistent with previous research showing that first-year university students often face higher levels of psychological distress compared to their non-university counterparts [30,31,32]. Longitudinal studies conducted in Australia, Germany, and Canada indicate that anxiety and depressive symptoms are prevalent and often persistent among first-year university students. The key risk factors include loneliness, financial and academic stress, and substance use. In contrast, protective factors such as a strong sense of university belonging, mindfulness, and effective coping strategies contribute to better psychological well-being. Although symptom severity may fluctuate slightly, the transition to university is a critical period for mental health, underscoring the need for preventive measures and targeted support [33,34,35].

A study by Duffy et al. (2020) [36] found that, at the beginning of the academic year, 28% of first-year university students exhibited depressive symptoms, and 33% showed signs of anxiety. By the end of the year, these rates had increased to 36% and 39%, respectively. Female students were more affected than their male counterparts and also reported higher levels of stress, sleep disturbances, and low self-esteem. These findings highlight a significant deterioration in mental health over the course of the first academic year [36].

Numerous studies emphasize the importance of paying close attention to both the physical and psychological health of students [8,11,16]. In our study, hypnosis was employed as a support strategy for first-year university students. The results revealed a concordance between the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-14) and the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) within this experimental context. This finding highlights the relevance of using the VAS as a complementary tool in student support interventions, allowing for the rapid and intuitive assessment of students’ stress levels. This is consistent with previous research that regards the VAS as a simple and effective tool, frequently used in psychology, coaching, and therapeutic settings to quickly evaluate an individual’s emotional state in relation to stress [37,38]. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) is a valid and reliable tool for detecting differences in perceived stress levels between groups [39].

Our study demonstrated that hypnosis significantly reduced stress levels among first-year students at the ISPITS, Rabat. These findings are consistent with those of [34], which reported that hypnotherapy is an effective tool for managing exam-related anxiety in nursing students. Compared to students who did not receive the intervention, those who participated in hypnosis sessions also reported improved overall well-being and greater resilience in coping with stress. Hypnosis was found to be an effective method for altering emotional perceptions associated with challenging situations, such as examinations and family separation. The stress levels showed a significant reduction compared to the baseline levels measured before the coaching sessions. According to Salem et Bonvin (2007) [24], this approach enables students to connect with their inner resources, mobilizing latent abilities, as well as both conscious and unconscious memory, including learning capacities that are often underutilized.

The “MED-WELL” study conducted among medical students at the University of Limerick demonstrated that an integrated physical activity program is both feasible and well accepted, with clear benefits for student well-being. After six weeks, the participants reported significant improvements in overall well-being, sleep quality, feelings of loneliness, and levels of physical activity. Most students expressed support for the continuation of the program, while also suggesting adjustments regarding session intensity and its integration into the academic schedule [40] (paragraphe a integrer dans les alternatives).

This study has several limitations that should be acknowledged. First, the sample was limited to nursing students from a single institution, which may restrict the generalizability of the findings to other populations and academic settings. Second, while clinical screening was conducted to identify psychological vulnerability, no formal psychiatric diagnostic tools (e.g., SCID) were used at the baseline, which may limit the precision of the exclusion criteria. Third, the follow-up period was limited to the immediate post-intervention phase, and no long-term data were collected to assess the durability of the effects. Finally, although this study was randomized and stratified, blinding was not feasible due to the nature of the hypnosis intervention, which may introduce performance or expectancy bias. These limitations should be taken into account when interpreting the results and designing future research.

5. Conclusions

The results of this study confirm that exam-related anxiety remains a recurring issue among first-year nursing students. Hypnosis, as a mind–body approach, demonstrated significant effectiveness in reducing their perceived stress levels, thereby fostering improved emotional regulation and more conducive learning conditions. These findings support the integration of non-pharmacological interventions such as hypnosis into student support programs to enhance academic resilience and psychological well-being.

Furthermore, the existing literature reinforces the added value of combining hypnosis with evidence-based therapies such as cognitive-behavioral therapy to enhance their impact on mental health and academic performance. The implementation of such multimodal strategies could be particularly beneficial in health sciences education, where students are frequently exposed to high stress levels.

In light of these findings, it appears essential that educational stakeholders, including faculty, administrators, and mental health professionals, recognize the importance of structured emotional support systems. Incorporating regular and accessible interventions like hypnosis into institutional health promotion policies could serve as a powerful lever to improve not only academic success, but also overall quality of life of nursing students.