Suggestion Timing Moderates the Effects of Prior Pain Experiences on Pain Perception.

Two common elements in patient care are reoccurring painful events (eg, blood draws) and verbal suggestions from others for lessened pain. Research shows that verbal suggestions for lower pain can decrease subsequent pain perception from novel noxious stimuli, but it is less clear how these suggestions and prior painful experiences combine to influence the perception of a reoccurring painful event. The presented experiment tested the hypothesis that the order of these 2 factors influence pain perception for a reoccurring painful event. All participants (702 healthy college-student volunteers, 58% women, 85.5% White) experienced a novel painful event on one arm, then again on their other arm (now a familiar pain event). Participants who received the suggestion that they can tolerate more pain on the second arm relative to the first from the outset, before the initial pain event, perceived relatively less pain during the repeated event as compared to participants who received the same suggestion after the first painful event or no-suggestion (control). Given many pain events within medical contexts are, or become, familiar to patients, further researching the timing at which patients receive verbal suggestions for lower pain can inform practices to optimize the therapeutic, pain-reducing potential of such suggestions. PERSPECTIVE: Providing suggestions that a familiar pain event (ie, the second of 2) will be less painful than a prior event can reduce perceived pain for the familiar event depending on when it is presented. These findings can inform practices to optimize the therapeutic potential of verbal suggestions for reduced pain.

Testing a positive-affect induction to reduce verbally induced nocebo hyperalgesia in an experimental pain paradigm.

There is an ethical obligation to notify individuals about potential pain associated with diagnoses, treatments, and procedures; however, supplying this information risks inducing nocebo hyperalgesia. Currently, there are few empirically derived strategies for reducing nocebo hyperalgesia. Because nocebo effects are linked to negative affectivity, we tested the hypothesis that a positive-affect induction can disrupt nocebo hyperalgesia from verbal suggestion. Healthy volunteers (N = 147) were randomly assigned to conditions in a 2 (affect induction: positive vs neutral) by 2 (verbal suggestion: no suggestion vs suggestion of pain increase) between-subjects design. Participants were induced to experience positive or neutral affect by watching movie clips for 15 minutes. Next, participants had an inert cream applied to their nondominant hand, and suggestion was manipulated by telling only half the participants the cream could increase the pain of the upcoming cold pressor test. Subsequently, all participants underwent the cold pressor test (8 ± 0.04°C), wherein they submerged the nondominant hand and rated pain intensity on numerical rating scales every 20 seconds up to 2 minutes. In the neutral-affect conditions, there was evidence for the nocebo hyperalgesia effect: participants given the suggestion of pain displayed greater pain than participants not receiving this suggestion, P's < 0.05. Demonstrating a blockage effect, nocebo hyperalgesia did not occur in the positive-affect conditions, P's > 0.5. This is the first study to show that positive affect may disrupt nocebo hyperalgesia thereby pointing to a novel strategy for decreasing nocebo effects without compromising the communication of medical information to patients in clinical settings.

Why does choice enhance treatment effectiveness? Using placebo treatments to demonstrate the role of personal control.

In modern health care, individuals frequently exercise choice over health treatment alternatives. A growing body of research suggests that when individuals choose between treatment options, treatment effectiveness can increase, although little experimental evidence exists clarifying this effect. Four studies were conducted to test the hypothesis that exercising choice over treatment alternatives enhances outcomes by providing greater personal control. Consistent with this possibility, in Study 1 individuals who chronically desired control reported less pain from a laboratory pain task when they were able to select between placebo analgesic treatments. Study 2 replicated this finding with an auditory discomfort paradigm. In Study 3, the desire for control was experimentally induced, and participants with high desire for control benefited more from a placebo treatment when they were able to choose their treatment. Study 4 revealed that the benefit of choice on treatment efficacy was partially mediated by thoughts of personal control. This research suggests that when individuals desire control, choice over treatment alternatives improves treatment effectiveness by enhancing personal control.