No abstract

Background: Placebo and nocebo effects occur in clinical or laboratory medical contexts after administration of an inert treatment or as part of active treatments and are due to psychobiological mechanisms such as expectancies of the patient. Placebo and nocebo studies have evolved from predominantly methodological research into a far-reaching interdisciplinary field that is unravelling the neurobiological, behavioural and clinical underpinnings of these phenomena in a broad variety of medical conditions. As a consequence, there is an increasing demand from health professionals to develop expert recommendations about evidence-based and ethical use of placebo and nocebo effects for clinical practice. Methods: A survey and interdisciplinary expert meeting by invitation was organized as part of the 1st Society for Interdisciplinary Placebo Studies (SIPS) conference in 2017. Twenty-nine internationally recognized placebo researchers participated. Results: There was consensus that maximizing placebo effects and minimizing nocebo effects should lead to better treatment outcomes with fewer side effects. Experts particularly agreed on the importance of informing patients about placebo and nocebo effects and training health professionals in patient-clinician communication to maximize placebo and minimize nocebo effects. Conclusions: The current paper forms a first step towards developing evidence-based and ethical recommendations about the implications of placebo and nocebo research for medical practice, based on the current state of evidence and the consensus of experts. Future research might focus on how to implement these recommendations, including how to optimize conditions for educating patients about placebo and nocebo effects and providing training for the implementation in clinical practice.

In analgesic clinical trials, adverse events are reported for the painkiller under evaluation and compared with adverse events in the placebo group. Interestingly, patients who receive the placebo often report a high frequency of adverse events, but little is understood about the nature of these negative effects. In the present study, we compared the rates of adverse events reported in the placebo arms of clinical trials for three classes of anti-migraine drugs: NSAIDs, triptans and anticonvulsants. We identified 73 clinical trials in 69 studies describing adverse events in placebo groups: 8 were clinical trials with NSAIDs, 56 were trials with triptans, and 9 were trials with anticonvulsants. Studies were selected of all Medline/PubMed or CENTRAL referenced trials published until 2007. Adverse event profiles of the three classes were compared using a systematic review approach. We found that the rate of adverse events in the placebo arms of trials with anti-migraine drugs was high. In addition, and most interestingly, the adverse events in the placebo arms corresponded to those of the anti-migraine medication against which the placebo was compared. For example, anorexia and memory difficulties, which are typical adverse events of anticonvulsants, were present only in the placebo arm of these trials. These results suggest that the adverse events in placebo arms of clinical trials of anti-migraine medications depend on the adverse events of the active medication against which the placebo is compared. These findings are in accordance with the expectation theory of placebo and nocebo effects.

Patients' expectations are important predictors of the outcome of analgesic treatments, as demonstrated predominantly in research on placebo effects. Three commonly investigated interventions that have been found to induce expectations (verbal suggestion, conditioning, and mental imagery) entail promising, brief, and easy-to-implement adjunctive procedures for optimizing the effectiveness of analgesic treatments. However, evidence for their efficacy stems mostly from research on experimentally evoked pain in healthy samples, and these findings might not be directly transferable to clinical populations. The current meta-analysis investigated the effects of these expectation inductions on patients' pain relief. Five bibliographic databases were systematically searched for studies that assessed the effects of brief verbal suggestion, conditioning, or imagery interventions on pain in clinical populations, with patients experiencing experimental, acute procedural, or chronic pain, compared with no treatment or control treatment. Of the 15,955 studies retrieved, 30 met the inclusion criteria, of which 27 provided sufficient data for quantitative analyses. Overall, a medium-sized effect of the interventions on patients' pain relief was observed (Hedges g = 0.61, I = 73%), with varying effects of verbal suggestion (k = 18, g = 0.75), conditioning (always paired with verbal suggestion, k = 3, g = 0.65), and imagery (k = 6, g = 0.27). Subset analyses indicated medium to large effects on experimental and acute procedural pain and small effects on chronic pain. In conclusion, patients' pain can be relieved with expectation interventions; particularly, verbal suggestion for acute procedural pain was found to be effective.