Placebos without deception: a randomized controlled trial in irritable bowel syndrome

Preserving the placebo effect after disclosure: A new perspective on non-deceptive placebos

The present study explores whether a particular style of placebo disclosure could serve as a tool to foster a renewed trust in one's own inherent resources and elicit a meaningful placebo effect. In a motor performance task, two placebo groups received inert transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) in each of four sessions along with information on its force-enhancing properties. Before the final session, one of the placebo groups was informed about the placebo, which was portrayed as a means to unleash an inherent potential. Along with force, we systematically monitored task-specific self-efficacy to test whether this variable would be differentially modulated in the two placebo groups. Compared to two control groups, placebo groups showed higher force and self-efficacy in the last session. No differences in self-efficacy were observed in the placebo groups even after revealing the placebo procedure, suggesting that the disclosure was effective in 'safeguarding' individuals' self-efficacy. These findings may have important implications, paving the way for the use of placebos that not only are ethically permissible but also support individuals' self-efficacy.

Can observational learning reinforce open-label placebo hypoalgesia?

ABSTRACT

Previous research has indicated that an open-label placebo can reduce pain in both healthy participants and patients with chronic pain. Because nondeceptive placebos seem to be an effective and more ethical alternative to deceptive placebos, optimizing this kind of treatment is essential. Observational learning was previously shown to induce the deceptive placebo effect; therefore, this study aimed to verify its effectiveness in fortifying the open-label placebo effect. Healthy volunteers (N = 117) were randomly assigned to 4 groups: open-label placebo with observational learning (OLP + OBL), open-label placebo (OLP), deceptive placebo with observational learning (OBL), or control group. Participants underwent baseline and testing measurements, during which they self-reported pain induced by heat stimulation. Between assessments, placebo cream was openly administered in the OLP and OLP + OBL groups. The OLP + OBL group next watched a model experiencing hypoalgesia after cream application. In the OBL group, participants received placebo cream with no information about its effect, and then they watched the model. The placebo effect was successfully evoked in all experimental groups (OLP + OBL, OLP, and OBL), which confirms the effectiveness of both open-label and deceptive placebo interventions for pain reduction. However, the hypoalgesic effect was of similar magnitude in the OLP and OLP + OBL groups, which indicates that observation did not contribute to the effect. The results showed that reinforcing the open-label placebo by observational learning may be redundant, but more research is needed to confirm these findings.

Reducing Emotional Distress with Open-Label Placebos: Assessing the Role of Motor Engagement in Pill Consumption

It has been posited that ingesting a pill constitutes a pivotal action that facilitates the effects of open-label placebos (OLPs: placebos honestly prescribed). In the present OLP experiment, the motor components of a placebo treatment were systematically varied. The participants (n = 183) were randomly allocated to one of four groups that all viewed aversive pictures. The 'active OLP' group took a placebo pill with specific instructions concerning the sequence of motor actions for the intake. The 'usual OLP' group swallowed the pill (without specific motor instructions), while the third group received an 'imaginary OLP' (no pill intake). The fourth group applied cognitive reappraisal (CR; active control group) to reduce emotional distress. The participants rated their affective state as well as the efficacy and plausibility of the treatment approach. Moreover, blood pressure and pulse were recorded as indicators of bodily arousal. The four groups did not differ in their valence ratings and physiological measures. The 'imaginary OLP' received higher ratings for both effectiveness and plausibility than the 'usual OLP'. CR was rated as superior relative to all OLP conditions. In conclusion, reducing emotional distress with OLPs does not necessitate the consumption of a placebo pill. In terms of acceptability and ease of implementation, CR stands as a well-established alternative.

Working with patients' treatment expectations - what we can learn from homeopathy

The usual homeopathic remedy, "globules," does not contain any pharmacologically active ingredient. However, many patients and practitioners report beneficial effects of homeopathic treatment on various health outcomes. Experimental and clinical research of the last two decades analyzing the underlying mechanisms of the placebo effect could explain this phenomenon, with patients' treatment expectations as the predominant mechanism. Treatment expectations can be optimized through various factors, such as prior information, communication, and treatment context. This narrative review analyses how homeopathy successfully utilizes these factors. Subsequently, it is discussed what evidence-based medicine could learn from homeopathic practice to optimize treatment expectations (e.g., using an empathic, patient-centered communication style, deliberately selecting objects in practice rooms, or using clear treatment rituals and salient contextual stimuli) and thereby treatment effectiveness. Homeopathic remedy does not work beyond the placebo effect but is recommended or prescribed as an active treatment by those who believe in it. Thus, practitioners need to understand the manner in which homeopathy (as an example of inert treatment) works and are advised to reintegrate its underlying effective placebo mechanisms into evidence-based medicine. This promises to increase treatment efficacy, tolerability, satisfaction, and compliance with evidence-based treatments, and addresses the desires patients are trying to satisfy in homeopathy in an ethical, fully informed way that is grounded in evidence-based medicine.

Effectiveness of a Balanced Nine-Strain Synbiotic in Primary-Care Irritable Bowel Syndrome Patients-A Multi-Center, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

The aim of the study was to characterize effects of a multi-strain synbiotic in patients with moderate to severe irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) of all stool form types. A total of 202 adult IBS patients were randomized (1:1) and after a four-week treatment-free run-in phase and were treated either with the synbiotic or a placebo for 12 weeks. The primary endpoints were the assessment of the severity of IBS symptoms (IBS-SSS) and the improvement of IBS global symptoms (IBS-GIS). Secondary endpoints comprised adequate relief (IBS-AR scale), stool form type (Bristol Stool Form Scale), bowel movements, severity of abdominal pain and bloating, stool pressure, feeling of incomplete stool evacuation, and adverse events. A total of 201 patients completed the study. Synbiotic treatment, in comparison to placebo, significantly improved IBS-SSS and IBS-GIS scores. At the end of the treatment, 70% of patients in the synbiotic group achieved adequate relief. After 12 weeks of treatment, the secondary endpoints were favorably differentiated in the synbiotic group when compared with the placebo group. Two patients in the synbiotic group reported transient adverse events (headache). The results indicate that treatment of IBS patients with the synbiotic significantly improved all major symptoms of IBS and was well-tolerated. The ClinicalTrials.gov registration was NCT05731232.

Change in pain expectations but no open-label placebo analgesia: An experimental study using the heat pain paradigm

BACKGROUND

Open-label placebos (OLP) prescribed without deception and with a convincing rationale have been shown to evoke powerful treatment effects. Patients' treatment expectations seem to influence the magnitude of the effect.

OBJECTIVE

We examined if two different OLP rationales increased pain tolerance and reduced pain intensity and unpleasantness in a standardized heat pain experiment.

METHODS

Participants (N = 71) who self-reported reoccurring pain for at least the last 3 months were randomly assigned to one of three groups. We compared a personal-emotional and a scientific-matter-of-fact rationale with a control group (CG) that received the same placebo without any rationale. The rationale suggested a desensitizing effect on pain perception and improved pain coping of the placebo, whereas in the CG it was introduced as an ointment for measurement. The primary outcomes were pre-post changes in pain tolerance, expected and experienced pain intensity and unpleasantness.

RESULTS

Participants showed a decrease in expected pain intensity, but not expected pain unpleasantness for both rationales. There were no differences in pain tolerance and experienced pain intensity and unpleasantness.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that evoking positive treatment expectations is not sufficient to elicit an OLP response. Possibly, the magnitude of expectations change in this study was not powerful enough to evoke an OLP effect. Additionally, it is possible that OLP effects in pain are unrelated to positive treatment expectations. The failure of OLP in our study is in contrast to a number of previous studies examining the effects of OLP in experimental and clinical pain.

SIGNIFICANCE

This study provides evidence that positive treatment expectations are not sufficient to evoke an open-label placebo effect in a standardized heat pain experiment. We showed that two different rationales improved participants treatment expectations, but failed to evoke a placebo effect in comparison to a control group that received the same placebo, labelled as an ointment to improve measurement quality.

Choice over placebo administration enhances open-label placebo hypoalgesia

ABSTRACT

Many studies indicate that deceptively administered placebos can improve pain outcomes. However, the deception involved presents an ethical barrier to translation because it violates informed consent and patient autonomy. Open-label placebos (OLPs), inert treatments that are openly administered as placebos, have been proposed as an ethically acceptable alternative. Early studies have suggested that OLP can improve pain outcomes, but important questions remain as to how to maximise OLP hypoalgesia to improve treatment outcomes in pain patients. This study investigated whether providing choice over when to administer an OLP treatment has the capacity to enhance OLP hypoalgesia using an electrocutaneous pain paradigm. One hundred thirty-two healthy volunteers were randomised to 3 types of treatment: OLP with choice, OLP without choice, and no treatment (natural history). The OLP groups were further randomised such that half were tested with a consistent pain intensity and the other half were tested with variable pain intensity to mimic day-to-day variability in pain intensity in health settings. The results indicated that treatment provided with choice exhibited greater OLP hypoalgesia than that provided without choice and that greater expectancy mediated this effect. Of interest, there was no evidence for OLP hypoalgesia without choice relative to natural history. Furthermore, variability in pain intensity did not affect OLP hypoalgesia. The current findings present novel evidence that choice over treatment administration may be a cheap and effective strategy for boosting the efficacy of OLPs in the clinical care of pain.

A Fictionalist Account of Open-Label Placebo

The placebo effect is now generally defined widely as an individual's response to the psychosocial context of a clinical treatment, as distinct from the treatment's characteristic physiological effects. Some researchers, however, argue that such a wide definition leads to confusion and misleading implications. In response, they propose a narrow definition restricted to the therapeutic effects of deliberate placebo treatments. Within the framework of modern medicine, such a scope currently leaves one viable placebo treatment paradigm: the non-deceptive and non-concealed administration of "placebo pills" or open-label placebo (OLP) treatment. In this paper, I consider how the placebo effect occurs in OLP. I argue that a traditional, belief-based account of OLP is paradoxical. Instead, I propose an account based on the non-doxastic attitude of pretence, understood within a fictionalist framework.

Effects of (non)deceptive placebos on reported sleep quality and food cue reactivity

A lack of sleep can increase appetite, particularly for high-calorie food. The current study tested the effects of an open-label placebo for improving sleep quality and reducing food cue reactivity. In open-label placebo interventions, placebo recipients are informed that they are receiving a placebo without a pharmacologically active substance. Participants (n = 150) were randomly allocated to one of three groups that received either an open-label placebo to improve sleep quality, a deceptive placebo ("melatonin"), or no placebo. The placebo was administered daily before bedtime for 1 week. Sleep quality and reactivity to high-calorie food cues (appetite, visual attention to food images) were assessed. The deceptive placebo (but not the open-label placebo) reduced reported sleep-onset latency. The open-label placebo decreased perceived sleep efficiency. The placebo interventions did not change food cue reactivity. This study demonstrated that open-label placebos do not present an alternative to deceptive placebos for improving sleep quality. The undesirable open-label placebo effects found warrant further exploration.

Translating knowledge on placebo and nocebo effects into clinical practice

Introduction

Positive and negative treatment expectations are powerful modulators of health and treatment outcomes. A substantial part of treatment success is due to contextual factors modulating patient's expectations towards a treatment. Consequently, treatment expectations should be a target of therapeutic interventions themselves.

Objectives

This article highlights the neurobiological underpinnings of treatment expectations as well as strategies to modulate contextual factors to optimize treatment outcomes in daily clinical settings.

Methods

This clinical update aligns with the 2022 IASP Global Year Translating Pain Knowledge into Practice and selectively reviews the best available evidence and practice.

Results

The effects of treatment expectations, also known as placebo and nocebo effects, are observed in various clinical conditions and physiological systems. However, most of our knowledge comes from the field of pain, where expectation effects substantially contribute to overall analgesic treatment outcomes. Experimental placebo analgesia paradigms provide the best illustration of how analgesic effects can be attributed not only to a pharmacological or specific treatment, but instead are the result of the expectation towards the treatment. The impact of expectations on treatment outcome is highly variable between individuals, and the identification of factors predicting an individual's response has proven to be challenging. Further research is required to provide personalized treatment strategies for the daily clinical practice.

Conclusion

Patient's previous experiences and expectations are powerful modulators of treatment efficacy, tolerability, and adherence. By providing a comprehensive overview of recent advances in this field, this review offers valuable insights for clinicians and researchers seeking to improve patient-clinician interaction.

The pill you don't have to take that is still effective: neural correlates of imaginary placebo intake for regulating disgust

A commonly established protocol for the administration of open-label placebos (OLPs)-placebos honestly prescribed-emphasizes the necessity of ingesting the pill for the placebo effect to manifest. The current functional magnetic resonance imaging study used a novel approach to OLP administration: the imaginary intake of an OLP pill for regulating disgust. A total of 99 females were randomly allocated to one of three groups that either swallowed a placebo pill (OLP Pill), imagined the intake of a placebo pill (Imaginary Pill) or passively viewed (PV) repulsive and neutral images. The imaginary pill reduced reported disgust more effectively than the OLP pill and was also perceived as a more plausible method to reduce emotional distress. Relative to the OLP pill, the imaginary pill lowered neural activity in a region of interest involved in disgust processing: the pallidum. No significant differences in brain activation were found when comparing the OLP pill with PV. These findings highlight that imagining the intake of an OLP emerged as a superior method for regulating feelings of disgust compared to the actual ingestion of a placebo pill. The study's innovative approach sheds new light on the potential of placebo interventions in emotion regulation.

Open-label placebos enhance test performance and reduce anxiety in learner drivers: a randomized controlled trial

Passing the driving school test can be very challenging, especially in big cities, where up to 52% of all students fail this test. Consequently, many learner drivers experience stress and anxiety. For some learner drivers these feelings can be extreme and negatively affect the performance in the driving test. Different strategies to face anxiety and stress are known, including, for example, psychological or pharmacological approaches and even placebo pills. Recent intriguing findings have also demonstrated that placebos without deception, so-called open-label placebos, successfully reduce anxiety. Here we aimed to test effects of this novel treatment for learner drivers. We investigated whether open-label placebos affect test performance and feelings of anxiety in learner drivers. Sixty-eight healthy participants (mean age 21.94 years, 26 females) were randomized into two groups. The open-label placebo group received placebo pills two weeks before the driving test (two pills each day). The control group received no treatment. Results revealed that the open-label placebo group experienced significantly less anxiety than the control group before the test (measured with the State-Trait-Anxiety-Inventory, STAI-S, and the German Test Anxiety Inventory, PAF). Moreover, in the open-label placebo group less learner drivers failed the driving test (29.41% vs. 52.95%). The results suggest that open-label placebos may provide an ethical unproblematic way to experience less anxiety and might also enhance the probability to pass the driving test. We discuss possible mechanisms of open-label placebos and limitations of our findings.

Boosting open-label placebo effects in acute induced pain in healthy adults (BOLPAP-study): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial

Introduction

Pain is a highly prevalent symptom in the hospital setting, but treatment options remain limited. Harnessing the placebo effect in an ethical manner could provide a new possibility to reduce pain in clinical practice. So called open-label placebos (OLP) have been shown to elicit significant effects in reducing acute pain. But, before implementation, more knowledge concerning the properties of OLPs is needed. This study aims to assess the duration of analgesic effects from OLP and to determine the possibility of boosting such effects.

Methods and analysis

This is the protocol of an ongoing (first patient enrolled in March 2023) single-site randomized trial investigating OLPs in two parts (i.e., substudies). In both parts, pain will be induced in healthy adults using an intradermal electrical stimulation model. Participants in Part 1 will have two study visits: An interventional visit with one OLP injection accompanied by an evidence-based treatment rationale and a control visit with no treatment. For Part 2, participants will be randomized into three groups: (1) A fixed-time "Booster" group including one single repetition of the OLP injection at a fixed time point, (2) an on-demand "Booster" group including one single repetition of the OLP injection on-demand, and (3) a control group who will receive just one OLP injection. Differences in pain ratings over time (using the Numeric Rating Scale) will be analyzed with several two-sample t-tests. The time point for a fixed-time "Booster" in Part 2 will be derived from Part 1 with additional statistical tools such as a broken-stick mixed-effect model.

Discussion

This study aims to further characterize the analgesic effects of OLPs. In doing so, it will provide valuable information needed for later implementation of OLPs in clinical practice, where they could play a role in multimodal analgesic concepts.

Ethics and dissemination

The "Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz" (BASEC 2023-00296) approved the study protocol. Results of the analysis will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

Clinical Trial Registration

This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05819476) and is listed in the Swiss National Registry at kofam.ch (SNCTP000005470).

Placebo analgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia in patients with Alzheimer disease and healthy participants

ABSTRACT

The role of placebo analgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia in patients with Alzheimer disease (AD) is largely unknown, with only few studies in the area. Therefore, this study aims to investigate to which extent placebo analgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia effects are present in patients experiencing mild-to-moderate AD. Twenty-one patients with AD (test population) and 26 healthy participants (HP; design validation) were exposed to thermal pain stimulation on 3 test days: Lidocaine condition (open/hidden lidocaine administration), capsaicin condition (open/hidden capsaicin administration), and natural history (no treatment), in a randomized, within-subject design. Open lidocaine and open capsaicin were accompanied by verbal suggestions for pain relief and pain increase, respectively. Expected pain and actual pain intensity were measured on a numerical rating scale (0-10). Placebo and nocebo effects were calculated as pain differences in open-hidden lidocaine and capsaicin, respectively, controlled for no treatment. Healthy participants obtained a placebo effect ( P = 0.01) and a trend for a nocebo effect ( P = 0.07). Patients with AD did not obtain a placebo effect ( P = 0.44) nor a significant nocebo effect ( P = 0.86). Healthy participants expected lower and higher pain with open vs hidden lidocaine and capsaicin, respectively ( P < 0.001). The same expectation effects were seen in patients with AD (open vs hidden lidocaine, P = 0.008; open vs hidden capsaicin, P < 0.001). With a well-controlled experimental setting, this study suggests that patients with AD may not experience placebo analgesia effects. Nocebo hyperalgesia effects in patients with AD needs further research. These findings may have implications for the conduction of clinical trials and the treatment of patients with AD in clinical practice.

Can Pharmacological Conditioning as an Add-On Treatment Optimize Standard Pharmacological Treatment in Patients with Recent-Onset Rheumatoid Arthritis? A Proof-of-Principle Randomized Clinical Trial

Medication regimens using conditioning via variable reinforcement have shown similar or improved therapeutic effects as full pharmacological treatment, but evidence in patient populations is scarce. This proof-of-principle double-blind randomized clinical trial examined whether treatment effects in recent-onset rheumatoid arthritis (RA) can be optimized through pharmacological conditioning. After four months of standardized treatment (n = 46), patients in clinical remission (n = 19) were randomized to the Control group (C), continuing standardized treatment (n = 8), or the Pharmacological Conditioning (PC) group, receiving variable treatment according to conditioning principles (n = 11). After eight months, treatment was tapered and discontinued linearly (C) or variably (PC). Standard treatment led to large improvements in disease activity and HRQoL in both groups. The groups did not differ in the percentage of drug-free clinical remission obtained after conditioning or continued standard treatment. The PC group did show a larger decrease in self-reported disease activity (Cohen's d = 0.9) and a smaller increase in TNF-α levels (Cohen's d = 0.7) than the C group. During all phases, more differences between groups were found for the patients who followed protocol than for the intention-to-treat sample. Although the results are not conclusive, pharmacological conditioning may have some advantages in terms of disease progression and stability, especially during the conditioning phase, compared with standard clinical treatment. The effects may be particularly beneficial for patients who show a good initial response to increased medication dosages.

A pilot study of trauma-sensitive yoga and Breathe2Relax among service members in an intensive outpatient program

Emerging research indicates that yoga is a promising adjunct to psychological trauma treatment. The current pilot study examined the associations between psychophysiological stress, diaphragmatic breathing (DB), and a trauma-sensitive yoga (TSY) regimen developed specifically for trauma-exposed service members in alignment with recent calls for precision in reporting therapeutic yoga protocols. Participants were 31 service members enrolled in a trauma-focused intensive outpatient program (IOP). Service members participated in a brief diaphragmatic breathing (DB) session using the Breathe2Relax (B2R) app followed by the TSY session. Heart rate (HR) and perceived stress were measured at baseline and after both the DB practice and the TSY session. We assessed Yoga and DB expectancies at baseline and post TSY. Participants also rated the acceptability and usability of the B2R app. Results of linear mixed effects regression models showed decreases in HR and perceived stress, compared to baseline, following DB (HR, b = -8.68, CI 95% = -13.34, -4.02; perceived stress, b = -1.77, CI 95% = -2.35, -1.18) and TSY (HR, b = -12.44, CI 95% = -17.15, -7.73; perceived stress b = -3.69, CI 95% = -4.29, -3.08). Higher levels of expectancies, compared to lower levels, related to stronger decreases in HR and perceived stress, particularly after TSY. Overall, participants rated the B2R usability as high; virtually all participants reported that "most would learn to use the app quickly," and 76.6% reported that they would use it frequently.

Research Progress for Probiotics Regulating Intestinal Flora to Improve Functional Dyspepsia: A Review

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a common functional gastrointestinal disorder. The pathophysiology remains poorly understood; however, alterations in the small intestinal microbiome have been observed. Current treatments for FD with drugs are limited, and there are certain safety problems. A class of active probiotic bacteria can control gastrointestinal homeostasis, nutritional digestion and absorption, and the energy balance when taken in certain dosages. Probiotics play many roles in maintaining intestinal microecological balance, improving the intestinal barrier function, and regulating the immune response. The presence and composition of intestinal microorganisms play a vital role in the onset and progression of FD and serve as a critical factor for both regulation and potential intervention regarding the management of this condition. Thus, there are potential advantages to alleviating FD by regulating the intestinal flora using probiotics, targeting intestinal microorganisms. This review summarizes the research progress of probiotics regarding improving FD by regulating intestinal flora and provides a reference basis for probiotics to improve FD.

The Roles of Endogenous Opioids in Placebo and Nocebo Effects: From Pain to Performance to Prozac

Placebo and nocebo effects have been well documented for nearly two centuries. However, research has only relatively recently begun to explicate the neurobiological underpinnings of these phenomena. Similarly, research on the broader social implications of placebo/nocebo effects, especially within healthcare delivery settings, is in a nascent stage. Biological and psychosocial outcomes of placebo/nocebo effects are of equal relevance. A common pathway for such outcomes is the endogenous opioid system. This chapter describes the history of placebo/nocebo in medicine; delineates the current state of the literature related to placebo/nocebo in relation to pain modulation; summarizes research findings related to human performance in sports and exercise; discusses the implications of placebo/nocebo effects among diverse patient populations; and describes placebo/nocebo influences in research related to psychopharmacology, including the relevance of endogenous opioids to new lines of research on antidepressant pharmacotherapies.

Amitriptyline at Low-Dose and Titrated for Irritable Bowel Syndrome as Second-Line Treatment in primary care (ATLANTIS): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Most patients with irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) are managed in primary care. When first-line therapies for IBS are ineffective, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline suggests considering low- dose tricyclic antidepressants as second-line treatment, but their effectiveness in primary care is unknown, and they are infrequently prescribed in this setting.

METHODS

This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial (Amitriptyline at Low-Dose and Titrated for Irritable Bowel Syndrome as Second-Line Treatment [ATLANTIS]) was conducted at 55 general practices in England. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, with Rome IV IBS of any subtype, and ongoing symptoms (IBS Severity Scoring System [IBS-SSS] score ≥75 points) despite dietary changes and first-line therapies, a normal full blood count and C-reactive protein, negative coeliac serology, and no evidence of suicidal ideation. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to low-dose oral amitriptyline (10 mg once daily) or placebo for 6 months, with dose titration over 3 weeks (up to 30 mg once daily), according to symptoms and tolerability. Participants, their general practitioners, investigators, and the analysis team were all masked to allocation throughout the trial. The primary outcome was the IBS-SSS score at 6 months. Effectiveness analyses were according to intention-to-treat; safety analyses were on all participants who took at least one dose of the trial medication. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN Registry (ISRCTN48075063) and is closed to new participants.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 18, 2019, and April 11, 2022, 463 participants (mean age 48·5 years [SD 16·1], 315 [68%] female to 148 [32%] male) were randomly allocated to receive low-dose amitriptyline (232) or placebo (231). Intention-to-treat analysis of the primary outcome showed a significant difference in favour of low-dose amitriptyline in IBS-SSS score between groups at 6 months (-27·0, 95% CI -46·9 to -7·10; p=0·0079). 46 (20%) participants discontinued low-dose amitriptyline (30 [13%] due to adverse events), and 59 (26%) discontinued placebo (20 [9%] due to adverse events) before 6 months. There were five serious adverse reactions (two in the amitriptyline group and three in the placebo group), and five serious adverse events unrelated to trial medication.

INTERPRETATION

To our knowledge, this is the largest trial of a tricyclic antidepressant in IBS ever conducted. Titrated low-dose amitriptyline was superior to placebo as a second-line treatment for IBS in primary care across multiple outcomes, and was safe and well tolerated. General practitioners should offer low-dose amitriptyline to patients with IBS whose symptoms do not improve with first-line therapies, with appropriate support to guide patient-led dose titration, such as the self-titration document developed for this trial.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health and Care Research Health Technology Assessment Programme (grant reference 16/162/01).

Toward Parsimony in Bias Research: A Proposed Common Framework of Belief-Consistent Information Processing for a Set of Biases

One of the essential insights from psychological research is that people's information processing is often biased. By now, a number of different biases have been identified and empirically demonstrated. Unfortunately, however, these biases have often been examined in separate lines of research, thereby precluding the recognition of shared principles. Here we argue that several-so far mostly unrelated-biases (e.g., bias blind spot, hostile media bias, egocentric/ethnocentric bias, outcome bias) can be traced back to the combination of a fundamental prior belief and humans' tendency toward belief-consistent information processing. What varies between different biases is essentially the specific belief that guides information processing. More importantly, we propose that different biases even share the same underlying belief and differ only in the specific outcome of information processing that is assessed (i.e., the dependent variable), thus tapping into different manifestations of the same latent information processing. In other words, we propose for discussion a model that suffices to explain several different biases. We thereby suggest a more parsimonious approach compared with current theoretical explanations of these biases. We also generate novel hypotheses that follow directly from the integrative nature of our perspective.

The role of positive information provision in open-label placebo effects

Open label placebos (OLPs) appear generally efficacious among clinical samples, but the empirical evidence regarding their use in non-clinical and sub-clinical samples, as well as when administered independent of a convincing rationale, is mixed. Healthy participants (N = 102) were randomised to either a 6-day course of OLP pills with information provision (OLP-plus: N = 35), without information provision (OLP-only: N = 35), or no-treatment control group (N = 32). OLP pills were described as enhancing physical (symptoms and sleep) and psychological (positive and negative emotional) well-being. Well-being was assessed at baseline and on Day 6. Expectancies and adherence were measured. OLP administration interacted with baseline well-being. The OLP-plus group demonstrated increased well-being on all outcomes other than positive emotions, but only when they reported decreased baseline well-being. OLP-only and control groups did not differ. The OLP-plus group demonstrated elevated expectancies, that mediated the OLP effect on physical symptoms relative to control, but only when well-being was lower than average at baseline (i.e. moderated-mediation). Results demonstrate the importance of information provided with OLPs. The moderating effect of baseline outcomes may reconcile inconsistent results regarding clinical and non-clinical samples. Accounting for baseline symptoms in non-clinical and sub-clinical samples is likely to enhance our understanding of when OLPs are effective.

Is Positive Communication Sufficient to Modulate Procedural Pain and Anxiety in the Emergency Department? A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Research suggests that therapeutic communication could enhance patient comfort during medical procedures. Few studies have been conducted in clinical settings, with adequate blinding. Our hypothesis was that a positive message could lead to analgesia and anxiolysis, and that this effect would be enhanced by an empathetic interaction with the nurse performing the procedure, compared with an audio-taped message. This study aimed to modulate the contents and delivery vector of a message regarding peripheral intravenous catheter (PIC) placement in the emergency department (ED).

METHODS

This study was a 2 + 2 randomized controlled trial registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03502655). A positive versus standard message was delivered through audio tape (double-blind) in the first phase ( N = 131) and through the nurse placing the catheter (single-blind) in the second phase ( N = 120).

RESULTS

By design, low practitioner empathic behavior was observed in the first phase (median, 1 of 5 points). In the second phase, higher empathic behavior was observed in the positive than in the standard message (median, 2 versus 3, p < .001). Contrary to our hypothesis, the intervention did not affect pain or anxiety reports due to PIC placement in either phase (all p values > .2).

CONCLUSIONS

The positive communication intervention did not impact pain or anxiety reports after PIC. There might have been a floor effect, with low PIC pain ratings in a context of moderate pain due to the presenting condition. Hence, such a therapeutic communication intervention might not be sufficient to modulate a mild procedural pain in the ED.

Can open label placebos improve pain and gluten tolerance via open label placebos in fibromyalgia patients? A study protocol for a randomised clinical trial in an outpatient centre

INTRODUCTION

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is defined as a medical condition with chronic widespread musculoskeletal pain accompanied by mood disorders, fatigue and sleep disturbances. Treatment of this condition can often be challenging. As nutrition in general and nutritional interventions in the context of illness management become more and more important, current research also focuses on the relevance of diets for FMS, including gluten as field of interest. To date, there is no clear evidence that a gluten-free diet or other nutritional interventions are significantly important for the reduction of pain in the context of FMS. Only a very few studies show that FMS patients respond to a gluten-free diet and that cytokine production (also in FMS) can be reduced through the change. However, these studies have not investigated whether and to what extent cognitive factors, such as the expectation of symptom reduction triggered by diet, play a role. Recent research shows that treatment expectation plays an important role in the course of the disease and in the effectiveness of treatment approaches. For example, there are promising pain treatment options using open-label placebos (OLPs), which show that expectation alone, rather than the pharmacological substance of medication, can reduce pain experience. In our study protocol, we hypothesise that treatment expectation can be positively influenced by the given information regarding the placebos, resulting in improved treatment outcomes for pain and indigestions.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this trial, patients with FMS will undergo a food challenge and take an OLP (patients will be informed about the placebo), followed by a 3-week OLP treatment. The subjects will be randomised into four groups: (a) gluten-free porridge+neutral OLP instructions; (b) gluten-free porridge+positive OLP instructions; (c) gluten-containing porridge+neutral OLP instructions and (d) gluten-containing porridge+positive OLP instructions. Patients will be recruited via different institutions and support groups in Hamburg. The inclusion criteria are (a) diagnosed FMS, (b) absence of wheat allergy, coeliac disease or pain-related red flags and (c) being a minimum age of 18 years. The study requires 100 subjects to assess the primary outcomes: pain intensity and occurence of indigestion. Secondary outcomes are functional capacity, treatment expectation, and different pain-related and inflammation-related blood parameters. The measure time points will be before and after the food challenge and before and after the 3-week OLP treatment.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained in October 2021 from the Hamburg Medical Ethics Council. The results of the study will be disseminated through publications, presentations and conference meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS; DRKS00027130).

Nocebo effects in visceral pain: concept and design of the experimental randomized-controlled pain study 'NoVis'

The role of psychological factors in the pathophysiology and treatment of chronic visceral pain in disorders of gut-brain interactions (DGBI) is increasingly appreciated. Placebo research has underscored that expectations arising from the psychosocial treatment context and from prior experiences shape treatment responses. However, effects of negative expectations, i.e., nocebo effects, as they are likely crucial elements of DGBI patients' clinical reality, have thus far only rarely been investigated in the context of visceral pain, with untapped potential for improved prevention and treatment. The experimental randomized-controlled pain study "NoVis," carried out within the Collaborative Research Center (CRC) 289 ("Treatment Expectation"), aims to close gaps regarding the generation and persistence of nocebo effects in healthy volunteers. It is designed to elucidate effects of negative expectations in a multiple-threat paradigm with intensity-matched rectal distensions and cutaneous thermal stimuli, allowing to test nocebo effects in the visceral and somatic pain modalities. Negative expectations are experimentally induced by elements of doctor-patient communication (i.e., instruction) and/or by surreptitious amplification of symptom intensity (i.e., experience/learning) within a treatment context. Accordingly, the repeated measures between-subject design contains the between-group factors "treatment instruction" (negative vs. control) and "treatment experience" (negative vs. control), with volunteers randomized into four experimental groups undergoing several pain stimulation phases (repeated factor). This allows to compare the efficacy of instruction vs. experience, and more importantly, their combined effects on the magnitude of negative expectations and their impact on pain responses, which we expect will be greatest for the visceral modality. After a Baseline, short-term effects are assessed during a test phase accomplished on study day 1 (Test-1 Phase). To explore the persistence of effects, a second test phase is accomplished 1 week later (Test-2 Phase). Effects of negative expectations within and across pain modalities are assessed at the subjective and objective levels, with a focus on psychophysiological and neuroendocrine measures related to stress, fear, and anxiety. Since nocebo effects can play a considerable role in the generation, maintenance, or worsening of chronic visceral pain, and may even constitute risk factors for treatment failure, knowledge from experimental nocebo research has potential to improve treatment outcomes in DGBI and other clinical conditions associated with chronic visceral pain.

Study protocol: combined N-of-1 trials to assess open-label placebo treatment for antidepressant discontinuation symptoms [FAB-study]

BACKGROUND

Antidepressant discontinuation is associated with a broad range of adverse effects. Debilitating discontinuation symptoms can impede the discontinuation process and contribute to unnecessary long-term use of antidepressants. Antidepressant trials reveal large placebo effects, indicating a potential use of open-label placebo (OLP) treatment to facilitate the discontinuation process. We aim to determine the effect of OLP treatment in reducing antidepressant discontinuation symptoms using a series of N-of-1 trials.

METHODS

A series of randomized, single-blinded N-of-1 trials will be conducted in 20 patients with fully remitted DSM-V major depressive disorder, experiencing moderate to severe discontinuation symptoms following antidepressant discontinuation. Each N-of-1 trial consists of two cycles, each comprising two-week alternating periods of OLP treatment and of no treatment in a random order, for a total of eight weeks. Our primary outcome will be self-reported discontinuation symptoms rated twice daily via the smartphone application 'StudyU'. Secondary outcomes include expectations about discontinuation symptoms and (depressed) mood. Statistical analyses will be based on a Bayesian multi-level random effects model, reporting posterior estimates of the overall and individual treatment effects.

DISCUSSION

Results of this trial will provide insight into the clinical application of OLP in treating antidepressant discontinuation symptoms, potentially offering a new cost-effective therapeutic tool. This trial will also determine the feasibility and applicability of a series of N-of-1 trials in a clinical discontinuation trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05051995, first registered September 20, 2021.

Placebo effects in osteoarthritis: implications for treatment and drug development

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common form of arthritis worldwide, affecting ~500 million people, yet there are no effective treatments to halt its progression. Without any structure-modifying agents, management of OA focuses on ameliorating pain and improving function. Treatment approaches typically have modest efficacy, and many patients have contraindications to recommended pharmacological treatments. Drug development for OA is hindered by the gradual and progressive nature of the disease and the targeting of established disease in clinical trials. Additionally, new medications for OA cannot receive regulatory approval without demonstrating improvements in both structure (pathological features of OA) and symptoms (reduced pain and/or improved function). In clinical trials, people with OA show high 'placebo responses', which hamper the ability to identify new effective treatments. Placebo responses refer to the individual variability in response to placebos given in the context of clinical trials and other settings. Placebo effects refer specifically to short-lasting improvements in symptoms that occur because of physiological changes. To mitigate the effects of the placebo phenomenon, we must first understand what it is, how it manifests, how to identify placebo responders in OA trials and how these insights can be used to improve clinical trials in OA. Leveraging placebo responses and effects in clinical practice might provide additional avenues to augment symptom management of OA.

How familiar are German dermatologists with placebo and nocebo effects and to what extent are these targeted in clinical practice: A survey within the dermatological community

BACKGROUND

Every medical treatment inevitably comprises not only physiological, but also psychological components, reflected by placebo and nocebo effects, which significantly affect treatment outcome. However, the extent of knowledge on the mechanisms steering placebo and nocebo effects in the dermatological community in Germany is currently unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the state of knowledge about placebo and nocebo effects in the German dermatological community, to evaluate whether this knowledge is already being used in clinical practice, and to investigate whether German dermatologists are interested in learning more about the topic.

METHODS

German Dermatologists, the majority working in their own practice, were asked to fill in an online survey addressing the knowledge about placebo and nocebo effects and the feasibility of special techniques to enhance placebo and minimize nocebo effects within the clinical routine.

RESULTS

N = 154 complete (79%) or partial (21%) responses to the survey were recorded in the online database and included in the analysis. All participants reported to know what the placebo effect is and 59.7% (74/124) indicated that they already had experience with prescribing or recommending a treatment without active substances. In contrast, only 62.0% (80/129) stated to know what the nocebo effect is. Participants showed a rather superficial knowledge regarding placebo and nocebo mechanisms. The majority of participants (76.7%, 99/129) expressed their willingness to be further educated about the underlying mechanisms mediating placebo and nocebo effects and the possible application in clinical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

The current survey offers a so far unique insight into the state of knowledge of German dermatologists on placebo and nocebo effects. The results indicate a need for education about this topic. Encouragingly, however, German dermatologists considered communication strategies to maximize placebo and reduce nocebo effects and expressed motivation to be trained to implement these strategies in everyday clinical practice.

Evidencing general acceptability of open-label placebo use for tackling overtreatment in primary care: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Overtreatment poses a challenge to healthcare systems due to harmful consequences of avoidable side-effects and costs. This study presents the first account for examining the feasibility of placebo use for reducing overtreatment in primary care, including whether public attitudes support the use of different placebo types in place of inappropriate prescriptions of antibiotics, antidepressants, or analgesics.

METHODS

We used a multi-study, mixed-methods design, including patient and public (PPI) consultations, focus groups (Study 1) and two pre-registered online experiments (Studies 2 and 3).

RESULTS

Study 1 (N = 16) explored everyday conceptions and practicalities of potential placebo use in the context of respiratory infections. Findings highlighted the importance of trusting doctor-patient relationships and safety-netting. Study 2 employed a randomised experiment with a representative UK sample (N = 980), investigating attitudes towards 5 different treatment options for respiratory infections: (1) blinded + pure placebo, (2) open-label + pure placebo, (3) open-label + impure placebo, (4) antibiotic treatment, and (5) no treatment. Study 2 also examined how attitudes varied based on wording and individual differences. Findings indicated general support (ηp2 = .149, large effect size) for replacing inappropriate antibiotics with open-label + impure placebos, although personal placebo acceptability was lower. Also, older people, individuals suffering from chronic illness or those showing higher levels of health anxiety appeared less amenable to placebo use. Study 3 (N = 1177) compared attitudes towards treatment options across three clinical scenarios: respiratory infection, depression and pain. Findings suggested significant differences in the acceptability of placebo options based on the clinical context. In the infection scenario, options for open-label + pure placebos, open-label + impure placebos and no treatment were rated significantly more acceptable (ηp2 = .116, medium effect size) compared to the depression and pain scenarios. Again, general support for placebos was higher than placebo acceptability for personal use.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from PPI and three studies indicate general support for combatting overprescribing in primary care through clinical placebo use. This is an indicator for wider UK public support for a novel, behavioural strategy to target a long-standing healthcare challenge. General acceptability appears to be highest for the use of open-label + impure placebos in the context of antibiotic overprescribing.

Effects of an open-label placebo intervention on reactions to social exclusion in healthy adults: a randomized controlled trial

Social exclusion, that is being left out by others, can have adverse consequences for individuals' psychological well-being. Even short-term experiences of social exclusion strongly threaten basic psychological needs and cause so-called social pain. Prior research suggests an overlap between the experience of social and physical pain that, amongst others, is reflected by the effectiveness of physical pain treatments in alleviating social pain. Drawing upon these prior findings, we here explore whether open-label placebos, which have previously been found to be effective in reducing physical pain, can alleviate social pain following social exclusion. Seventy-four healthy participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions in a 2 × 2 between-subjects design: First, they either received an open-label placebo intervention or no treatment. Second, they either experienced inclusion or exclusion by their co-players in the interactive ball-tossing game Cyberball. We find that excluded participants in the open-label placebo condition experienced significantly less hurt feelings compared to those in the control condition (Cohen's d = 0.77). There was no effect of treatment for need threat. The findings suggest new possibilities to alleviate social pain, which is of particular interest in the context of preventing destructive and maladaptive behaviors in situations where functional coping strategies are unavailable.

Reattribution to Mind-Brain Processes and Recovery From Chronic Back Pain: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

In primary chronic back pain (CBP), the belief that pain indicates tissue damage is both inaccurate and unhelpful. Reattributing pain to mind or brain processes may support recovery.

Objectives

To test whether the reattribution of pain to mind or brain processes was associated with pain relief in pain reprocessing therapy (PRT) and to validate natural language-based tools for measuring patients' symptom attributions.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This secondary analysis of clinical trial data analyzed natural language data from patients with primary CBP randomized to PRT, placebo injection control, or usual care control groups and treated in a US university research setting. Eligible participants were adults aged 21 to 70 years with CBP recruited from the community. Enrollment extended from 2017 to 2018, with the current analyses conducted from 2020 to 2022.

Interventions

PRT included cognitive, behavioral, and somatic techniques to support reattributing pain to nondangerous, reversible mind or brain causes. Subcutaneous placebo injection and usual care were hypothesized not to affect pain attributions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

At pretreatment and posttreatment, participants listed their top 3 perceived causes of pain in their own words (eg, football injury, bad posture, stress); pain intensity was measured as last-week average pain (0 to 10 rating, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating greatest pain). The number of attributions categorized by masked coders as reflecting mind or brain processes were summed to yield mind-brain attribution scores (range, 0-3). An automated scoring algorithm was developed and benchmarked against human coder-derived scores. A data-driven natural language processing (NLP) algorithm identified the dimensional structure of pain attributions.

Results

We enrolled 151 adults (81 female [54%], 134 White [89%], mean [SD] age, 41.1 [15.6] years) reporting moderate severity CBP (mean [SD] intensity, 4.10 [1.26]; mean [SD] duration, 10.0 [8.9] years). At pretreatment, 41 attributions (10%) were categorized as mind- or brain-related across intervention conditions. PRT led to significant increases in mind- or brain-related attributions, with 71 posttreatment attributions (51%) in the PRT condition categorized as mind- or brain-related, as compared with 22 (8%) in control conditions (mind-brain attribution scores: PRT vs placebo, g = 1.95 [95% CI, 1.45-2.47]; PRT vs usual care, g = 2.06 [95% CI, 1.57-2.60]). Consistent with hypothesized PRT mechanisms, increases in mind-brain attribution score were associated with reductions in pain intensity at posttreatment (standardized β = -0.25; t127 = -2.06; P = .04) and mediated the effects of PRT vs control on 1-year follow-up pain intensity (β = -0.35 [95% CI, -0.07 to -0.63]; P = .05). The automated word-counting algorithm and human coder-derived scores achieved moderate and substantial agreement at pretreatment and posttreatment (Cohen κ = 0.42 and 0.68, respectively). The data-driven NLP algorithm identified a principal dimension of mind and brain vs biomechanical attributions, converging with hypothesis-driven analyses.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this secondary analysis of a randomized trial, PRT increased attribution of primary CBP to mind- or brain-related causes. Increased mind-brain attribution was associated with reductions in pain intensity.

Placebos in pediatrics: A cross-sectional survey investigating physicians' perspectives

OBJECTIVE

Placebo responses are significantly higher in children than in adults, suggesting a potential underused treatment option in pediatric care. To facilitate the clinical translation of these beneficial effects, we explored physicians' current practice, opinions, knowledge, and likelihood of recommending placebos in the future.

METHODS

A cross-sectional web-based survey administered by REDCap was conducted at Boston Children's Hospital between October 2021 and March 2022. Physicians (n = 1157) were invited to participate through an email containing a link to a 23-item survey designed to assess physicians' attitudes and perceptions towards the clinical use of placebo in pediatrics.

RESULTS

From 207 (18%) returned surveys, 109 (9%) were fully completed. Most respondents (79%) believed that enhancing the therapeutic components that contribute to the placebo response may be a way of improving pediatric care. However, whereas most (62%) found placebo treatments permissible, only one-third reported recommending them. In pediatrics, placebos are typically introduced as a medicine that "might help" (43%). The most common treatments recommended to enhance placebo effects are physical therapy, vitamins, and over-the-counter analgesics. Physicians most frequently recommend placebos for occasional pain, headaches, and anxiety disorders. Finally, the great majority of physicians (87%) stated they would be more likely to recommend placebo treatments if there were safety and ethical guidelines for open-label placebos.

CONCLUSIONS

Placebo treatments seem permissible to physicians in pediatric care, but the development of safety and ethical guidelines may be necessary before physicians systematically incorporate the benefits of the placebo effect in pediatrics.

A randomized trial that compared brain activity, efficacy and plausibility of open-label placebo treatment and cognitive repappraisal for reducing emotional distress

Placebo pills can reduce emotional distress even when recipients have been informed about the inert nature of the treatment. However, before such open-label placebos (OLPs) can be recommended for general clinical use, their efficacy and acceptability need to be further investigated and compared with established methods for emotion regulation, such as cognitive reappraisal (CR). The current study with functional magnetic resonance imaging compared the effects of an OLP pill with CR for reducing a specific form of emotional distress: disgust. Participants (150 healthy females) were randomly allocated to one of three groups, all of which were exposed to disgusting and neutral images (OLP, CR, PV: passive viewing). It was tested whether the three groups would differ in brain activity and reported disgust. Ratings for the perceived efficacy and plausibility of treatment were also compared between OLP and CR. Both OLP and CR increased the activity in a cognitive control region, the ventrolateral prefrontal cortex. Relative to PV and OLP, CR reduced activity in the putamen and pallidum. These regions play an important role in decoding disgust signals from different modalities. Self-reports indicated that CR was perceived as a more effective and plausible intervention strategy than OLP. In conclusion, CR was a superior method for disgust regulation compared to OLP, both on the subjective as well as the neurobiological level. Future OLP studies are needed to test whether the observed effects generalize to other forms of emotional distress.

Non-Deceptive Placebos Can Promote Acts of Kindness: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Placebos have often been used to reduce emotional distress but rarely to increase positive feelings. The present study investigated whether a placebo can promote acts of kindness (AoKs) that are associated with emotional well-being. A total of 160 university students were asked to perform an AoK daily for one week. They evaluated their emotional state (feelings of pleasantness, arousal, satisfaction) directly before and after the AoKs. This was monitored via a smartphone app. One group performed each AoK after taking a non-deceptive placebo; the other group received no placebo. Before and after the one-week program, the participants completed three questionnaires that assessed satisfaction with life, positive/negative affect, and flourishing. The participants reported higher pleasantness directly after engaging in an AoK and more satisfaction with life after the program. The motivation to carry out AoKs decreased strongly over the week. However, placebo receivers completed more AoKs than the no-placebo group. The results indicate that placebo treatment can promote the performance of acts of kindness.

Magnitude of placebo response in clinical trials of paroxetine for vasomotor symptoms: a meta-analysis

Introduction

Vasomotor symptoms, or hot flashes, are among the most common complaints for menopausal and postmenopausal women. As an alternative to hormone replacement therapy, paroxetine mesylate became the only non-hormonal treatment approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), despite limited evidence for its efficacy. More specifically, there is uncertainty around paroxetine's unique benefit and the magnitude of the placebo response in clinical trials of paroxetine.

Methods

Relevant databases were searched to identify randomized clinical trials examining the efficacy of paroxetine to treat hot flashes. The primary outcomes of interest were hot flash frequency and hot flash severity scores. Data was extracted from the published results, and risk of bias assessments were conducted.

Results

Six randomized clinical trials that included a total of 1,486 women were coded and analyzed. The results demonstrated that 79% of the mean treatment response for hot flash frequency is accounted for by a placebo response, resulting in a mean true drug effect of 21% at most. Additionally, 68% of the mean treatment response for hot flash severity is accounted for by a placebo response, resulting in a maximum true drug effect of 32%.

Discussion

The results herein call into question the actual efficacy of the only FDA approved, non-hormonal treatment for hot flashes by demonstrating that a placebo response accounts for the majority of treatment responses for reductions in both hot flash frequency and severity. The findings provide evidence to reevaluate the use of paroxetine to treat postmenopausal hot flashes and emphasize the importance of considering effective, alternative treatments for vasomotor symptoms.

Open-label placebo treatment for reducing overeating in children: A study protocol for a randomized clinical trial with an app-assisted approach

Food advertising has become almost ubiquitous in Western societies. In adults as well as in children this omnipresence of food cues has been shown to trigger cravings and overeating, which can lead to overweight or even obesity. This is concerning because obesity is a leading cause of preventable diseases. The planned project aims at reducing craving and overeating in overweight/obese children using a placebo treatment. A total of 80 children (40 girls, 40 boys; aged between 8 and 12 years; body mass index >90th percentile) will take part in the study. A randomized controlled cross-over design will be implemented, which will include four weeks with daily placebo treatment and four weeks without placebo treatment. The placebo will be introduced without deception as an open-label placebo (OLP), that can help to control food cravings. The study will use an app-assisted approach: The children will rate the intensity of their cravings, the occurrence of binge-eating episodes, their emotional state, and placebo usage via a smartphone application. It is expected that the OLP will help the children to reduce cravings and body weight. If effective, this OLP approach could be implemented in weight-control programs for children.

The roles of expectation, comparator, administration route, and population in open-label placebo effects: a network meta-analysis

Three meta-analyses have demonstrated the clinical potential of open-label placebos (OLPs). However, there is a need to synthesize the existing evidence through more complex analyses that would make it possible to answer questions beyond mere efficacy. Such analyses would serve to improve the understanding of why and under what circumstances OLPs work (e.g., depending on induced expectations or across different control groups). To answer these questions, we conducted the first network meta-analyses in the field of OLPs. Our analyses revealed that OLPs could be beneficial in comparison to no treatment in nonclinical (12 trials; 1015 participants) and clinical populations (25 trials; 2006 participants). Positive treatment expectations were found to be important for OLPs to work. Also, OLP effects can vary depending on the comparator used. While the kind of administration route had no substantial impact on the OLP effects, effects were found to be larger in clinical populations than in nonclinical populations. These results suggest that the expectation, comparator, administration route, and population should be considered when designing and interpreting OLP studies.

Study protocol: randomised controlled trial of conditioned open-label placebo (COLP) for perioperative pain management in patients with head and neck cancer

INTRODUCTION

Patients with head and neck cancer have a substantial risk of chronic opioid dependence following surgery due to pain and psychosocial consequences from both the disease process and its treatments. Conditioned open-label placebos (COLPs) have been effective for reducing the dose of active medication required for a clinical response across a wide range of medical conditions. We hypothesise that the addition of COLPs to standard multimodal analgesia will be associated with reduced baseline opioid consumption by 5 days after surgery in comparison to standard multimodal analgesia alone in patients with head and neck cancer.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This randomised controlled trial will evaluate the use of COLP for adjunctive pain management in patients with head and neck cancer. Participants will be randomised with 1:1 allocation to either the treatment as usual or COLP group. All participants will receive standard multimodal analgesia, including opioids. The COLP group will additionally receive conditioning (ie, exposure to a clove oil scent) paired with active and placebo opioids for 5 days. Participants will complete surveys on pain, opioid consumption and depression symptoms through 6 months after surgery. Average change in baseline opioid consumption by postoperative day 5 and average pain levels and opioid consumption through 6 months will be compared between groups.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

There remains a demand for more effective and safer strategies for postoperative pain management in patients with head and neck cancer as chronic opioid dependence has been associated with decreased survival in this patient population. Results from this study may lay the groundwork for further investigation of COLPs as a strategy for adjunctive pain management in patients with head and neck cancer. This clinical trial has been approved by the Johns Hopkins University Institutional Review Board (IRB00276225) and is registered on the National Institutes of Health Clinical Trials Database.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04973748.

Susceptibility to Nocebo Hyperalgesia, Dispositional Optimism, and Trait Anxiety as Predictors of Nocebo Hyperalgesia Reduction

OBJECTIVES

The current paper explores the psychological predictors of nocebo hyperalgesia and whether the reduction of nocebo hyperalgesia can be predicted by susceptibility to nocebo hyperalgesia and psychological characteristics.

METHODS

Nocebo effects on pressure pain were first experimentally induced in 83 healthy female participants through conditioning with open-label instructions about the pain-worsening function of a sham TENS device to assess susceptibility to nocebo hyperalgesia. Participants were then randomized to 1 out of 2 nocebo-reduction conditions (counterconditioning/extinction) or to continued nocebo-conditioning (control), each combined with open-label instructions about the new sham device function. Dispositional optimism, trait and state anxiety, pain catastrophizing, fear of pain, and body vigilance were assessed at baseline.

RESULTS

The results showed that lower optimism and higher trait anxiety were related to a stronger induction of nocebo hyperalgesia. Moreover, a stronger induction of nocebo hyperalgesia and higher trait anxiety predicted a larger nocebo reduction across interventions. Also, nocebo hyperalgesia and optimism moderated the effects of the nocebo-reduction interventions, whereby larger nocebo hyperalgesia and lower optimism were associated with a larger nocebo reduction after counterconditioning, compared with control, and also extinction for larger nocebo hyperalgesia.

DISCUSSION

Our findings suggest that open-label conditioning leads to stronger nocebo hyperalgesia when trait anxiety is high and dispositional optimism is low, while these psychological characteristics, along with larger nocebo hyperalgesia, also predict open-label counterconditioning to be an effective nocebo-reduction strategy. Susceptibility to nocebo hyperalgesia, trait anxiety, and dispositional optimism might be indicators of a flexible pain regulatory system.

The Importance of the Treatment Rationale for Pain in Animal-Assisted Interventions: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Healthy Participants

Animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) is a promising treatment approach for pain, but possible mechanisms still need to be elucidated. This study set out to investigate the analgesic effects of an animal provided with a treatment rationale in a randomized controlled trial employing a standardized experimental heat-pain paradigm. We randomly assigned 128 healthy participants to: dog treatment (DT), placebo treatment (PT), dog and placebo treatment (DPT), and no treatment (NT). Primary outcomes were heat-pain tolerance and the corresponding self-reported ratings of pain unpleasantness and intensity. Results revealed no differences in heat-pain tolerance between the conditions. However, participants in the DT condition experienced heat-pain as significantly less unpleasant at the limit of their tolerance compared to participants in the NT condition (estimate = -0.96, CI = -1.58 to 0.34, P = .010). Participants in the DT condition also showed lower ratings of pain intensity at the limit of their tolerance compared to participants in the NT condition (estimate = -0.44, CI = -0.89 to 0.02, P = .060). This study indicates that a dog has analgesic effects on pain perception when integrated into the treatment rationale. We assume that providing a treatment rationale regarding the animal is important in AAIs for pain. PERSPECTIVE: This study shows that the presence of an animal is not sufficient for animal-assisted interventions (AAIs) to have an analgesic effect on pain unless they are provided with a treatment rationale. This could imply that not only the animal but also contextual factors are important in AAIs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials NCT04361968.

Blinded Pain Cocktails: A Reliable and Safe Opioid Weaning Method

Weaning opioids in patients with noncancerous chronic pain often poses a challenge when psychosocial factors complicate the patient's chronic pain syndrome and opioid use. A blinded pain cocktail protocol used to wean opioid therapy has been described since the 1970s. At the Stanford Comprehensive Interdisciplinary Pain Program, a blinded pain cocktail remains a reliably effective medication-behavioral intervention. This review (1) outlines psychosocial factors that may complicate opioid weaning, (2) describes clinical goals and how to use blinded pain cocktails in opioid tapering, and (3) summarizes the mechanism of dose-extending placebos and ethical justification of its use in clinical practice.

A randomized controlled trial of effects of open-label placebo compared to double-blind placebo and treatment-as-usual on symptoms of allergic rhinitis

Placebo effects are known for numerous clinical symptoms. Until recently, deception of placebos was thought to be essential for placebo effects, but intriguing new studies suggest that even placebos without concealment (open-label placebos) may help patients with various clinical disorders. Most of those studies compared open-label placebo treatments with no treatment conditions (or treatment "as usual"). Given that open-label placebo studies obviously cannot be blinded, additional control studies are important to assess the efficacy of open-label placebos. The current study aimed to fil this gap by comparing open-label with conventional double-blind placebos and treatment as usual. Patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis were randomly divided in different groups. The first group received open-label placebos, the second double-blind placebos, and the third was treated as usual. After 4 weeks, results demonstrated that open-label placebos improved allergic symptoms more than treatment-as-usual and even more as double-blind placebos. In addition, we observed that allergic symptoms in general (and also the open-label placebo effects) were reduced by the Covid-19 pandemic. The results suggest that seasonal allergic symptoms may be relieved by open-label placebos. We discuss these results by addressing possible different mechanisms of open-label and conventionally concealed placebo treatments.

The impact of pharmaceutical form and simulated side effects in an open-label-placebo RCT for improving psychological distress in highly stressed students

Open-label placebo (OLP) may be utilized to reduce psychological distress. Yet, potential contextual effects have not been explored. We investigated the impact of pharmaceutical form and the simulation of side effects in a parallel group RCT (DRKS00030987). A sample of 177 highly stressed university students at risk of depression were randomly assigned by computer generated tables to a 1-week intervention with active or passive OLP nasal spray or passive OLP capsule or a no-treatment control group. After the intervention, groups differed significantly in depressive symptoms but not regarding other outcomes of psychological distress (stress, anxiety, sleep quality, somatization), well-being or treatment expectation. OLP groups benefitted significantly more compared to the no-treatment control group (d = .40), OLP nasal spray groups significantly more than the OLP capsule group (d = .40) and the active OLP group significantly more than the passive OLP groups (d = .42). Interestingly, before intervention, most participants, regardless of group assignment, believed that the OLP capsule would be most beneficial. The effectiveness of OLP treatments seems to be highly influenced by the symptom focus conveyed by the OLP rationale. Moreover, pharmaceutical form and simulation of side effects may modulate efficacy, while explicit treatment expectation seems to play a minor role.

Open-label placebos-a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental studies with non-clinical samples

The use of open-label placebos (OLPs) has shown to be effective in clinical trials. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine whether OLPs are effective in experimental studies with non-clinical populations. We searched five databases on April 15, 2021. We conducted separate analyses for self-reported and objective outcomes and examined whether the level of suggestiveness of the instructions influenced the efficacy of OLPs. Of the 3573 identified records, 20 studies comprising 1201 participants were included, of which 17 studies were eligible for meta-analysis. The studies investigated the effect of OLPs on well-being, pain, stress, arousal, wound healing, sadness, itchiness, test anxiety, and physiological recovery. We found a significant effect of OLPs for self-reported outcomes (k = 13; standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.43; 95% CI = 0.28, 0.58; I² = 7.2%), but not for objective outcomes (k = 8; SMD =  - 0.02; 95% CI =  - 0.25, 0.21; I² = 43.6%). The level of suggestiveness of the instructions influenced the efficacy of OLPs for objective outcomes (p = 0.02), but not for self-reported outcomes. The risk of bias was moderate for most studies, and the overall quality of the evidence was rated low to very low. In conclusion, OLPs appear to be effective when examined in experimental studies. However, further research is needed to better understand the mechanisms underlying OLPs.

No long-term effects after a 3-week open-label placebo treatment for chronic low back pain: a 3-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial

ABSTRACT

Chronic low back pain is prevalent, highly disabling, and a relevant socioeconomic health concern. Although allocated to placebo groups, patients in randomized controlled trials show significant pain relief, pointing to the relevance of placebo effects. Overcoming ethical and legal concerns related to deceptive placebos, recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of short-term treatments for chronic low back pain with open-label (ie, nondeceptive) placebos. However, data on long-term efficacy of open-label placebos are sparse. Here, we report a 3-year follow-up of our previously published randomized controlled trial demonstrating pain reduction, improvement in disability, and depressive symptoms after a 3-week treatment with open-label placebos. Including records from 89 previously enrolled patients, we investigated changes between the groups with and without previous open-label placebo treatment in pain intensity (primary outcome), disability and mood (secondary outcomes), biopsychosocial factors and lifestyle (exploratory outcomes) from parent baseline to follow-up. Over the 3-year period, there were no differences in any outcome between groups with and without open-label placebo treatment. Therefore, our follow-up data do not support the previously suggested assumption that a 3-week open-label placebo treatment has long-term effects. This study was preregistered on April 14, 2020, in the German Clinical Trials Register (registration number DRKS00021405).

Teenagers' and parental attitudes towards the use of placebo pills

The placebo response a significant therapeutic improvement after a placebo intervention - can be high in children. The question arises of how optimal advantages of placebo treatment in pediatric clinical care be achieved. In this era of shared-decision making, it is important to be aware of patients' and parental attitudes. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to assess teenagers' and parental views on the use of placebo pills in pediatric clinical care. All patients (aged 12-18 years) and parents of children (aged 0-18 years), visiting the pediatric outpatient clinic between March 2020 through December 2020, were invited to participate in this study multicenter survey study. Of 1644 distributed questionnaires: 200/478 (47%) teenagers and 456/1166 (45%) parents filled out the complete survey. More parents were positive towards prescribing placebo medication than teenagers (80% vs. 71%, p = .019), especially when the clinician disclosed the use of a placebo to parents and teenagers, respectively (76% vs. 55%, p = .019). Increasing age of teenagers was positively associated with the willingness for placebo interventions (OR 0.803, 95%CI 0.659-0.979), as was a higher level of parental education (OR 0.706, 95%CI 0.526-0.949).  Conclusion: This study emphasizes the willingness of teenagers and parents to receive placebo medication. Placebo medication becoming more acceptable and integrated into daily care may contribute to a decrease in medication use. What is Known: • A placebo is a treatment without inherent power to produce any therapeutic effect, but can result in significant therapeutic improvement, the so-called placebo response. • Treatment response rates after placebo interventions in children can be high, ranging from 41 to 46% in pediatric trials. What is New: • Most teenagers (71%) and parents (80%) find it appropriate for healthcare professionals to prescribe placebo medication. • Compared to adult care, pediatrics has a unique feature to disclose placebo treatment to parents while concealing it for the young patient: the majority of teenagers (85%) and parents (91%) agree to disclose placebo treatment to parents exclusively.

What is autonomous sensory meridian response (ASMR)? A narrative review and comparative analysis of related phenomena

A narrative review of autonomous sensory meridian response (ASMR) was carried out. Definitional factors relevant to ASMR were canvassed. Related, but distinctly unique, sensorial phenomena, including frisson, synaesthesia, and misophonia were considered. Finally, the status of literature with respect to clinical outcomes, individual differences, and current research applications was evaluated. ASMR is a nascent phenomenon that has rapidly progressed in scope and depth of study throughout the past decade; a notable shift from brief-form studies to an increase in formalised trials is noted. Yet, critical questions remain unaddressed, including expectancy and placebo effects, that future research should interrogate.

Imaginary pills and open-label placebos can reduce test anxiety by means of placebo mechanisms

Placebos have been shown to be beneficial for various conditions even if administered with full transparency. Hence, so-called open-label placebos (OLPs) offer a new way to harness placebo effects ethically. To take this concept one step further, this study aimed at evaluating placebo effects without the use of a physical placebo, i.e., by imagining taking a pill. Healthy students (N = 173) with self-reported test anxiety were either randomized to an imaginary pill (IP; n = 55), an OLP (n = 59) or a control group (CG; n = 59). Both intervention groups were instructed to take two pills daily for three weeks. Primary outcome was test anxiety, secondary outcomes were sleep quality, general well-being and test performance. Groups test anxiety differed at study-endpoint, F(2,169) = 11.50, p < .001. Test anxiety was lower in the intervention groups compared to the CG, t(169) = - 4.44, p < .001, d = - 0.71. The interventions did not differ significantly, i.e., both were similarly efficacious, t(169) = 0.61, p = .540, d = 0.11. The interaction between group and time in explaining test anxiety was significant, F(5,407.93) = 6.13, p < .001. OLPs and IPs reduced test anxiety in healthy participants compared to the CG. This finding opens the door for a novel and ethical method to harness placebo effects.

Reduction in caffeine withdrawal after open-label decaffeinated coffee

BACKGROUND

Withdrawal from addictive drugs can be reduced by administering placebo deceptively, but in the clinic it is unethical to deceive the patient. Open-label placebo effects have been observed across a range of psychophysiological phenomena, and may also apply to drug withdrawal.

METHOD

24-hour abstinent heavy coffee drinkers (N = 61) rated their caffeine withdrawal symptoms before being allocated to one of three groups. The Deceptive group was given decaffeinated coffee (decaf) and told it was caffeinated, the Open-Label group given decaf and told it was decaf and the Control group given water and told it was water. After 45 min, caffeine withdrawal was measured again. All participants rated their expectancies of withdrawal reduction from caffeinated coffee, decaf and water prior to being randomised and the end of the study.

RESULTS

There was a significant 9.5-point reduction in caffeine withdrawal in the Open-Label group (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.7, 14.3; p = 0.002), which was 8.6 points less than the Deceptive group (95%CI: 0.4, 16.8; p = 0.014) but 8.9 points greater than the Control group (95%CI: 0.6, 17.2; p = 0.012). Pre-randomisation, participants expected caffeinated coffee to reduce their withdrawal symptoms the most, followed by water and decaf, Pre-randomisation expectancy of withdrawal was only associated with amount of withdrawal reduction in the Deceptive group.

CONCLUSION

It appears as if open-label placebo caffeine (i.e. decaf) can reduce caffeine withdrawal symptoms, even when people do not hold a conscious expectancy it will do so. There may be ways to integrate open-label placebo procedures into clinical interventions for drug dependence without violating informed consent.

Wenn aus einem Bauchgefühl viszerale Schmerzen werden: Placebo- und Nocebo-Mechanismen entlang der Darm-Hirn-Achse

Das Erleben von Schmerz ist nach heutigem Verständnis durch eine Vielzahl biologischer, psychologischer und sozialer Faktoren geprägt und somit eine komplexe, von der Nozizeption abzugrenzende, psychologische Erfahrung. Entsprechend ist das Schmerzerleben durch psychologische Faktoren modulierbar und chronische Schmerzen werden als biopsychosoziale Erkrankungen verstanden. Dies gilt auch für den Viszeralschmerz, dem spezifische psychophysiologische Prinzipien und neurobiologische Mechanismen zugrunde liegen, was eine interdisziplinäre Betrachtung unter Einbeziehung der Psychologie und der Neurowissenschaften erforderlich macht. Ausgehend von den bidirektionalen Verbindungen zwischen Darm und Hirn und aufbauend auf einem biopsychosozialen Krankheitsmodell beschreibt dieser Übersichtsbeitrag psychologische Mechanismen, die bei der Entstehung, Aufrechterhaltung und Therapie viszeraler Schmerzen wichtig sind. Dabei liegt der Fokus auf positiven und negativen Erwartungseffekten im psychosozialen Behandlungskontext. Therapieerwartungen können Krankheitssymptome sowohl positiv als auch negativ beeinflussen. Diese gemeinhin als Placebo- und Noceboeffekte bekannten Phänomene, die durch die Arzt-Patient Kommunikation, Lernprozesse, Stress und Furcht vermittelt werden, sind auch für den Viszeralschmerz bei gastrointestinalen Erkrankungen zunehmend anerkannt und Gegenstand aktueller grundlagenwissenschaftlicher und klinischer Forschungsaktivitäten. Neue interdisziplinäre und translationale Forschungsansätze aus der Forschung zu Placebo- und Noceboeffekten liefern spannende Einblicke in die zahlreichen Verbindungen und Wechselbeziehungen zwischen Darm und Gehirn bei normalen wie auch pathologischen Darm-Hirn Interaktionen und können dazu beitragen, die Pathophysiologie von Erkrankungen, die mit viszeralen Schmerzen einhergehen, besser zu verstehen und wichtige Erkenntnisse für neue Therapieansätze zu gewinnen.