Learning mechanisms in nocebo hyperalgesia: The role of conditioning and extinction processes. Thomaidou et al. Appendix 1. The TENS handout (translated from Dutch)Effectivity of electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) in increasing pain.Electrical nerve stimulation (ENS) is the administration of an electrical current produced by a

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text. Pain-related fear is shown to mediate the amplification of nocebo hyperalgesia, only when high pain is experienced and not when it is merely anticipated.

This comprehensive review summarizes and interprets the neurobiological correlates of nocebo hyperalgesia in healthy humans. Nocebo hyperalgesia refers to increased pain sensitivity resulting from negative experiences and is thought to be an important variable influencing the experience of pain in healthy and patient populations. The young nocebo field has employed various methods to unravel the complex neurobiology of this phenomenon and has yielded diverse results. To comprehend and utilize current knowledge, an up-to-date, complete review of this literature is necessary. PubMed and PsychInfo databases were searched to identify studies examining nocebo hyperalgesia while utilizing neurobiological measures. The final selection included 22 articles. Electrophysiological findings pointed toward the involvement of cognitive-affective processes, e.g., modulation of alpha and gamma oscillatory activity and P2 component. Findings were not consistent on whether anxiety-related biochemicals such as cortisol plays a role in nocebo hyperalgesia but showed an involvement of the cyclooxygenase-prostaglandin pathway, endogenous opioids, and dopamine. Structural and functional neuroimaging findings demonstrated that nocebo hyperalgesia amplified pain signals in the spinal cord and brain regions involved in sensory and cognitive-affective processing including the prefrontal cortex, insula, amygdala, and hippocampus. These findings are an important step toward identifying the neurobiological mechanisms through which nocebo effects may exacerbate pain. Results from the studies reviewed are discussed in relation to cognitive-affective and physiological processes involved in nocebo and pain. One major limitation arising from this review is the inconsistency in methods and results in the nocebo field. Yet, while current findings are diverse and lack replication, methodological differences are able to inform our understanding of the results. We provide insights into the complexities and involvement of neurobiological processes in nocebo hyperalgesia and call for more consistency and replication studies. By summarizing and interpreting the challenging and complex neurobiological nocebo studies this review contributes, not only to our understanding of the mechanisms through which nocebo effects exacerbate pain, but also to our understanding of current shortcomings in this field of neurobiological research.

Nocebo effects may occur when we learn to expect some thing bad will happen, such as our itch getting worse, and then, like a "self-fulfilling prophecy", the itch really does get worse because we expected it would. This study investiga ted 2 different ways in which such nocebo effects can oc cur in healthy participants: learning expectations through direct experience (classical conditioning) and learning expectations through observation (observational learning). While learning through direct experience led to nocebo effects on itch, there were no indications for observatio nal learning having this effect. This suggests that nocebo effects on itch can arise through first-hand, negative expe riences with itch treatments.To investigate learning processes underlying nocebo effects on itch, this study measured the efficacy of classical conditioning and observational learning for inducing nocebo effects on cowhage-evoked itch and scratching behaviour. A total of 58 healthy female participants were assigned to classical conditioning, observational learning, or sham conditioning groups. In the classical conditioning group, experimenters associated the application of an inert gel with increased itch intensity themselves. In the observational learning group, a video of the conditioning paradigm was shown. Nocebo effects were measured as the difference in itch or scratching between control and nocebo test phase trials, compared between learning and control groups. Compared with sham conditioning, classical conditioning induced a significant nocebo effect on itch, while observational learning did not. No nocebo effect on scratching was detected. These results highlight the role that learning through direct experiences plays in pruritic symptoms. Future research should investigate how a patient's history of unsuccessful treatments shapes treatment outcomes.

Placebo effects, positive treatment outcomes that go beyond treatment processes, can alter sensations through learning mechanisms. Understanding how methodological factors contribute to the magnitude of placebo effects will help define the mechanisms by which these effects occur. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental placebo studies in cutaneous pain and itch in healthy samples, focused on how differences in methodology contribute to the resulting placebo effect magnitude. We conducted meta-analyses by learning mechanism and sensation, namely, for classical conditioning with verbal suggestion, verbal suggestion alone, and observational learning, separately for pain and itch. We conducted subgroup analyses and meta-regression on the type of sensory stimuli, placebo treatment, number of acquisition and evocation trials, differences in calibrated intensities for placebo and control stimuli during acquisition, age, and sex. We replicated findings showing that a combination of classical conditioning with verbal suggestion induced larger placebo effects on pain (k 5 68, g 5 0.59) than verbal suggestion alone (k 5 39, g 5 0.38) and found a smaller effect for itch with verbal suggestion alone (k 5 7, g 5 0.14). Using sham electrodes as placebo treatments corresponded with larger placebo effects on pain than when topical gels were used. Other methodological and demographic factors did not significantly affect placebo magnitudes. Placebo effects on pain and itch reliably occur in experimental settings with varied methods, and conditioning with verbal suggestion produced the strongest effects. Although methods may shape the placebo effect to some extent, these effects appear robust overall, and their underlying learning mechanisms may be harnessed for applications outside the laboratory.