Search

Abstract: It is commonly believed that blinding to treatment assignment is necessary for placebos to have an effect. However, placebos administered without concealment (ie, open-label placebos [OLPs]) have recently been shown to be effective in some conditions. This study had 2 objectives: first, to determine whether OLP treatment is superior to no-pill control (NPC) in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) and, second, to compare the efficacy of OLP against double-blind placebo (DBP). In a 6-week, 3-arm, randomized clinical trial, participants were randomized in equal proportions to 3 arms: OLP, DBP, or NPC. Two hundred sixty-two adults (72.9% women), with a mean age of 42.0 (SD = 18.1) years, participated in the primary study. The mean improvement on the IBS Severity Scoring System from baseline to the 6-week end point was significantly greater in OLP compared with that in NPC (90.6 vs 52.3, P = 0.038). Open-label placebo and DBP did not differ significantly on IBS Severity Scoring System improvement (100.3 vs 90.6, P = 0.485). Standardized effect sizes were moderate for OLP vs NPC (d = 0.43) and small for OLP vs DBP (d = 0.10). Participants treated with OLP reported clinically meaningful improvements in IBS symptoms that were significantly greater than those on NPC. Open-label placebo and DBP had similar effects that did not differ significantly, suggesting that blinding may not be necessary for placebos to be effective and that OLP could play a role in the management of patients with refractory IBS., (Copyright © 2021 International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Abstract: Placebo effects have traditionally involved concealment or deception. However, recent evidence suggests that placebo effects can also be elicited when prescribed transparently as "open-label placebos" (OLPs), and that the pairing of an unconditioned stimulus (eg, opioid analgesic) with a conditioned stimulus (eg, placebo pill) can lead to the conditioned stimulus alone reducing pain. In this randomized control trial, we investigated whether combining conditioning with an OLP (COLP) in the immediate postoperative period could reduce daily opioid use and postsurgical pain among patients recovering from spine surgery. Patients were randomized to COLP or treatment as usual, with both groups receiving unrestricted access to a typical opioid-based postoperative analgesic regimen. The generalized estimating equations method was used to assess the treatment effect of COLP on daily opioid consumption and pain during postoperative period from postoperative day (POD) 1 to POD 17. Patients in the COLP group consumed approximately 30% less daily morphine milligram equivalents compared with patients in the treatment as usual group during POD 1 to 17 (-14.5 daily morphine milligram equivalents; 95% CI: [-26.8, -2.2]). Daily worst pain scores were also lower in the COLP group (-1.0 point on the 10-point scale; 95% CI: [-2.0, -0.1]), although a significant difference was not detected in average daily pain between the groups (-0.8 point; 95% CI: [-1.7, 0.2]). These findings suggest that COLP may serve as a potential adjuvant analgesic therapy to decrease opioid consumption in the early postoperative period, without increasing pain., (Copyright © 2021 International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Abstract: Long-term follow-up of patients treated with open-label placebo (OLP) are nonexistent. In this article, we report a 5-year follow-up of a 3-week OLP randomized controlled trial (RCT) in patients with chronic low back pain. We recontacted the participants of original RCT and reassessed their pain, disability, and use of pain medication. We obtained follow-up data from 55 participants (82% of those who took OLP during the parent RCT), with a mean elapsed time between the end of the 3 weeks placebo trial and the follow-up interview of 55 months (SD = 7.85). We found significant reductions in both pain and disability between the baseline assessment immediately before the 3 weeks trial with placebo pills and the original trial endpoint (P < 0.00001 for the 2 primary outcomes of pain and disability). At the 5-year follow-up, we found no significant differences in either outcome between original trial endpoint and follow-up. Improvements persisted after 5 years and were accompanied by substantial reductions compared with baseline in the use of pain medication (from 87% to 38%), comprising analgesics (from 80% to 31%), antidepressants (from 24% to 11%), and benzodiazepines (from 15% to 5%). By contrast, the use of alternative approaches to pain management increased (from 18% to 29%). Although the reduction in pain and medication is comparable with the improvements that occurred in the original study, a major limitation of this long-term follow-up is the absence of controls for spontaneous improvement and new cointerventions. Nonetheless, our data suggest that reductions in pain and disability after OLP may be long lasting., (Copyright © 2020 International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Accumulating evidence has shown that complicated brain systems are involved in the development and maintenance of chronic low back pain (cLBP), but the association between brain functional changes and clinical outcomes remains unclear. Here, we used resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) and multivariate pattern analysis to identify abnormal functional connectivity (FC) between the default mode, sensorimotor, salience, and central executive brain networks in cLBP and tested whether abnormal FCs are related to pain and comorbid symptoms. Fifty cLBP patients and 44 matched healthy controls (HCs) underwent an fMRI scan, from which brain networks were identified by independent component analysis. Multivariate pattern analysis, graph theory approaches, and correlation analyses were applied to find abnormal FCs that were associated with clinical symptoms. Findings were validated on a second cohort of 30 cLBP patients and 30 matched HCs. Results showed that the medial prefrontal cortex/rostral anterior cingulate cortex had abnormal FCs with brain regions within the default mode network and with other brain networks in cLBP patients. These altered FCs were also correlated with pain duration, pain severity, and pain interference. Finally, we found that resting-state FC could discriminate cLBP patients from HCs with 91% accuracy in the first cohort and 78% accuracy in the validation cohort. Our findings suggest that the medial prefrontal cortex/rostral anterior cingulate cortex may be an important hub for linking the default mode network with the other 3 networks in cLBP patients. Elucidating the altered FCs and their association with clinical outcomes will enhance our understanding of the pathophysiology of cLBP and may facilitate the development of pain management approaches.

Changes in central pain processing have been shown in patients with chronic low-back pain (cLBP). We used quantitative sensory testing methods to identify differences in pain sensitization between patients with cLBP (N = 167) and healthy controls (N = 33). Results indicated that, compared with healthy pain-free controls, cLBP patients showed increased sensitivity and greater painful aftersensations for mechanical pressure and pin-prick stimuli and lower tactile spatial acuity in the 2-point discrimination task (ps < 0.05). Then, we examined the role of pain catastrophizing as a mediator of the group differences in pain sensitization. We found that catastrophizing partially accounted for group differences in pressure required to produce moderate pain. Finally, we examined the relationship between pain sensitization, catastrophizing, and clinical pain among patients with cLBP. We found that catastrophizing and deep-tissue pressure pain were associated with greater pain intensity in the past month, week, and at the visit as well as low-back pain bothersomeness. Furthermore, deep-tissue pressure pain mediated the associations between catastrophizing and both pain in the past month and low-back pain severity. Taken together, these results indicate that not only do patients with cLBP demonstrate increased pain sensitization and decreased sensitivity to innocuous stimuli, but these changes are also linked with increased catastrophizing. Furthermore, both catastrophizing and sensitization are associated with increased clinical pain among cLBP patients.

Although self-report pain ratings are the gold standard in clinical pain assessment, they are inherently subjective in nature and significantly influenced by multidimensional contextual variables. Although objective biomarkers for pain could substantially aid pain diagnosis and development of novel therapies, reliable markers for clinical pain have been elusive. In this study, individualized physical maneuvers were used to exacerbate clinical pain in patients with chronic low back pain (N = 53), thereby experimentally producing lower and higher pain states. Multivariate machine-learning models were then built from brain imaging (resting-state blood-oxygenation-level-dependent and arterial spin labeling functional imaging) and autonomic activity (heart rate variability) features to predict within-patient clinical pain intensity states (ie, lower vs higher pain) and were then applied to predict between-patient clinical pain ratings with independent training and testing data sets. Within-patient classification between lower and higher clinical pain intensity states showed best performance (accuracy = 92.45%, area under the curve = 0.97) when all 3 multimodal parameters were combined. Between-patient prediction of clinical pain intensity using independent training and testing data sets also demonstrated significant prediction across pain ratings using the combined model (Pearson's r = 0.63). Classification of increased pain was weighted by elevated cerebral blood flow in the thalamus, and prefrontal and posterior cingulate cortices, and increased primary somatosensory connectivity to frontoinsular cortex. Our machine-learning approach introduces a model with putative biomarkers for clinical pain and multiple clinical applications alongside self-report, from pain assessment in noncommunicative patients to identification of objective pain endophenotypes that can be used in future longitudinal research aimed at discovery of new approaches to combat chronic pain.

Placebo effects have been reported in patients with chronic neuropathic pain. Expected pain levels and positive emotions are involved in the observed pain relief, but the underlying neurobiology is largely unknown. Patients with neuropathic pain are highly motivated for pain relief, and as motivational factors such as expectations of reward, as well as pain processing in itself, are related to the dopaminergic system, it can be speculated that dopamine release contributes to placebo effects in neuropathic pain. Nineteen patients with neuropathic pain after thoracic surgery were tested during a placebo intervention consisting of open and hidden applications of the pain-relieving agent lidocaine (2 mL) and no treatment. The dopamine antagonist haloperidol (2 mg) and the agonist levodopa/carbidopa (100/25 mg) were administered to test the involvement of dopamine. Expected pain levels, desire for pain relief, and ongoing and evoked pain were assessed on mechanical visual analog scales (0-10). Significant placebo effects on ongoing (P ≤ 0.003) and evoked (P ≤ 0.002) pain were observed. Expectancy and desire accounted for up to 41.2% and 71.5% of the variance in ongoing and evoked pain, respectively, after the open application of lidocaine. We found no evidence for an effect of haloperidol and levodopa/carbidopa on neuropathic pain levels (P = 0.071-0.963). Dopamine seemed to influence the levels of expectancy and desire, yet there was no evidence for indirect or interaction effects on the placebo effect. This is the first study to suggest that dopamine does not contribute to placebo effects in chronic neuropathic pain.

In randomized controlled trials, medication side effects may lead to beliefs that one is receiving the active intervention and enhance active treatment responses, thereby increasing drug-placebo differences. We tested these hypotheses with an experimental double-blind randomized controlled trial of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug with and without the addition of atropine to induce side effects. One hundred healthy volunteers were told they would be randomized to either combined analgesics that might produce dry mouth or inert placebos. In reality, they were randomized double blind, double-dummy to 1 of the 4 conditions: (1) 100 mg diclofenac + 1.2 mg atropine, (2) placebo + 1.2 mg atropine, (3) 100 mg diclofenac + placebo, or (4) placebo + placebo, and tested with heat-induced pain. Groups did not differ significantly in demographics, temperature producing moderate pain, state anxiety, or depression. Analgesia was observed in all groups; there was a significant interaction between diclofenac and atropine, without main effects. Diclofenac alone was not better than double-placebo. The addition of atropine increased pain relief more than 3-fold among participants given diclofenac (d = 0.77), but did not enhance the response to placebo (d = 0.09). A chain of mediation analysis demonstrated that the addition of atropine increased dry mouth symptoms, which increased beliefs that one had received the active medication, which, in turn, increased analgesia. In addition to this indirect effect of atropine on analgesia (via dry mouth and beliefs), analyses suggest that among those who received diclofenac, atropine directly increased analgesia. This possible synergistic effect between diclofenac and atropine might warrant future research.

This randomized controlled trial was performed to investigate whether placebo effects in chronic low back pain could be harnessed ethically by adding open-label placebo (OLP) treatment to treatment as usual (TAU) for 3 weeks. Pain severity was assessed on three 0- to 10-point Numeric Rating Scales, scoring maximum pain, minimum pain, and usual pain, and a composite, primary outcome, total pain score. Our other primary outcome was back-related dysfunction, assessed on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. In an exploratory follow-up, participants on TAU received placebo pills for 3 additional weeks. We randomized 97 adults reporting persistent low back pain for more than 3 months' duration and diagnosed by a board-certified pain specialist. Eighty-three adults completed the trial. Compared to TAU, OLP elicited greater pain reduction on each of the three 0- to 10-point Numeric Rating Scales and on the 0- to 10-point composite pain scale (P < 0.001), with moderate to large effect sizes. Pain reduction on the composite Numeric Rating Scales was 1.5 (95% confidence interval: 1.0-2.0) in the OLP group and 0.2 (-0.3 to 0.8) in the TAU group. Open-label placebo treatment also reduced disability compared to TAU (P < 0.001), with a large effect size. Improvement in disability scores was 2.9 (1.7-4.0) in the OLP group and 0.0 (-1.1 to 1.2) in the TAU group. After being switched to OLP, the TAU group showed significant reductions in both pain (1.5, 0.8-2.3) and disability (3.4, 2.2-4.5). Our findings suggest that OLP pills presented in a positive context may be helpful in chronic low back pain., Competing Interests: Sponsorships or competing interests that may be relevant to content are disclosed at the end of this article.

It is well known that acupuncture has pain-relieving effects, but the contribution of specific and especially nonspecific factors to acupuncture analgesia is less clear. One hundred one patients who developed pain of ≥ 3 on a visual analog scale (VAS, 0 to 10) after third molar surgery were randomized to receive active acupuncture, placebo acupuncture, or no treatment for 30 min with acupuncture needles with potential for double-blinding. Patients' perception of the treatment (active or placebo) and expected pain levels (VAS) were assessed before and halfway through the treatment. Looking at actual treatment allocation, there was no specific effect of active acupuncture (P=.240), but there was a large and significant nonspecific effect of placebo acupuncture (P<.001), which increased over time. Interestingly, however, looking at perceived treatment allocation, there was a significant effect of acupuncture (P<.001), indicating that patients who believed they received active acupuncture had significantly lower pain levels than those who believed they received placebo acupuncture. Expected pain levels accounted for significant and progressively larger amounts of the variance in pain ratings after both active and placebo acupuncture (up to 69.8%). This is the first study to show that under optimized blinding conditions, nonspecific factors such as patients' perception of and expectations toward treatment are central to the efficacy of acupuncture analgesia and that these factors may contribute to self-reinforcing effects in acupuncture treatment. To obtain an effect of acupuncture in clinical practice, it may therefore be important to incorporate and optimize these factors., (Copyright © 2013 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

The experience of pain can be significantly influenced by expectancy (predictive cues). This ability to modulate pain has the potential to affect therapeutic analgesia substantially and constitutes a foundation for nonpharmacological pain relief. In this study, we investigated (1) brain regions involved in visual cue modulation of pain during anticipation of pain, pain administration, and pain rating; and (2) the association between pretest resting state functional connectivity and the magnitude of cue effects on pain ratings. We found that after cue conditioning, visual cues can significantly modulate subjective pain ratings. Functional magnetic resonance imaging results suggested that brain regions pertaining to the frontoparietal network (prefrontal and parietal cortex) and a pain/emotion modulatory region (rostral anterior cingulate cortex) are involved in cue modulation during both pain anticipation and administration stage. Most interestingly, we found that pretest resting state functional connectivity between the frontoparietal network (as identified by independent component analysis) and the rostral anterior cingulate cortex/medial prefrontal cortex was positively associated with cue effects on pain rating changes. We believe that these findings will shed new light on our understanding of variable cue/expectancy effects across individuals and how the intrinsic connectivity of the brain may influence expectancy-induced modulation of pain., (Copyright © 2012 International Association for the Study of Pain. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Amitriptyline is sometimes used to treat arm pain related to repetitive use, but rigorous evidence of its benefit is lacking. This randomized controlled trial investigated whether amitriptyline provided greater pain relief or improved arm function than a placebo pill in adults with arm pain associated with repetitive use that had persisted for at least 3 months. Participants (N=118) were randomly assigned to receive 25mg of amitriptyline or a placebo pill for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was intensity of pain (10-point numerical rating scale) and secondary outcomes were arm symptoms, arm function, grip strength, mood, and sleep. Assessments were done at baseline, 3 and 6 weeks of treatment, and 1 month after the treatment ended. Changes in arm pain were not statistically significant. However, the amitriptyline group improved more than the placebo group in arm function (p=0.023) and sense of well being (p=0.034). In a longitudinal analysis, the amitriptyline group's arm function score improved 0.45 points per week faster than placebo after adjusting for subject characteristics (p=0.015). At the treatment's midpoint, the amitriptyline group reported more "troublesome side-effects" than the placebo group (52.5% vs. 27.1%, p=0.005), but this difference decreased by the end of the treatment (30.5% vs. 22.0%, p=0.30). The most frequent side effect was drowsiness. In conclusion, this study found that low-dose amitriptyline did not significantly decrease arm pain among these participants but did significantly improve arm function and well being. Future research is needed to explore the effects of higher doses and longer duration of treatment., (Copyright 2010 International Association for the Study of Pain. All rights reserved.)

Patients are often prepared for procedural discomforts with descriptions of pain or undesirable experiences. This practice is thought to be compassionate and helpful, but there is little data on the effect of such communicative behavior. This study assesses how such descriptions affect patients' pain and anxiety during medical procedures. The interactions of patients with their healthcare providers during interventional radiological procedures were videotaped during a previously reported 3-arm prospective randomized trial assessing the efficacy of self-hypnotic relaxation. One hundred and fifty-nine videos of the standard care and attention control arms were reviewed. All statements that described painful or undesirable experiences as warning before potentially noxious stimuli or as expression of sympathy afterwards were recorded. Patients' ratings of pain and anxiety on 0-10 numerical scales (0=No Pain, No Anxiety at All and 10=Worst Pain Possible, Terrified) after the painful event and/or sympathizing statement were the basis for this study. Warning the patient in terms of pain or undesirable experiences resulted in greater pain (P<0.05) and greater anxiety (P<0.001) than not doing so. Sympathizing with the patient in such terms after a painful event did not increase reported pain, but resulted in greater anxiety (P<0.05). Contrary to common belief, warning or sympathizing using language that refers to negative experiences may not make patients feel better. This conclusion has implications for the training in medical communication skills and suggests the need for randomized trials testing different patient-practioner interactions.