¿Influye la comunicación con el paciente sobre la kinesiofobia? Una revisión sistemática / Does patient communication influence kinesiophobia? A systematic review

El objetivo de la presente revisión sistemática consistió en determinar el efecto de la comunicación en el ámbito sanitario sobre la kinesiofobia. Para ello, se realizó una búsqueda bibliográfica en siete bases de datos entre noviembre de 2022 y febrero de 2023. La revisión se efectuó acorde a la declaración Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) y para el análisis de la calidad metodológica se utilizaron: la escala Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), los criterios de Van Tulder y el análisis del riesgo de sesgo de la Colaboración Cochrane. Se incluyeron un total de 13 artículos que presentaron una calidad metodológica media de 7,1 sobre 10. Se obtuvieron resultados significativos para al menos una variable (kinesiofobia, discapacidad o nivel de actividad física) en 12 trabajos. Existe evidencia sólida de que la comunicación puede influir sobre la kinesiofobia del sujeto. Es más probable que esta influencia ocurra en un sentido negativo o discapacitante, pero también puede actuar en sentido positivo disminuyendo la misma. (AU)

The aim of the present systematic review was to determine the effect of communication in the health care setting on kinesiophobia. To this end, a literature search was conducted in seven databases between November 2022 and February 2023. The review was carried out following the PRISMA statement and for the analysis of methodological quality we used: PEDro Scale, Van Tulder criteria and risk of bias analysis of the Cochrane Collaboration. A total of 13 articles were included with a mean methodological quality of 7.1 out of 10. Significant results were obtained for at least one variable (kinesiophobia, disability or level of physical activity) in 12 articles. There is strong evidence that communication can influence a subject's kinesiophobia. This influence is most likely to be in a negative or disabling sense, but it can also act in a positive sense by decreasing it. (AU)

Evidence and sources of placebo effects in transcranial direct current stimulation during a single session of visuospatial working memory practice.

Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) can be used to non-invasively augment cognitive training. However, the benefits of tDCS may be due in part to placebo effects, which have not been well-characterized. The purpose of this study was to determine whether tDCS can have a measurable placebo effect on cognitive training and to identify potential sources of this effect. Eighty-three right-handed adults were randomly assigned to one of three groups: control (no exposure to tDCS), sham tDCS, or active tDCS. The sham and active tDCS groups were double-blinded. Each group performed 20 min of an adapted Corsi Block Tapping Task (CBTT), a visuospatial working memory task. Anodal or sham tDCS was applied during CBTT training in a right parietal-left supraorbital montage. After training, active and sham tDCS groups were surveyed on expectations about tDCS efficacy. Linear mixed effects models showed that the tDCS groups (active and sham combined) improved more on the CBTT with training than the control group, suggesting a placebo effect of tDCS. Participants' tDCS expectations were significantly related to the placebo effect, as was the belief of receiving active stimulation. This placebo effect shows that the benefits of tDCS on cognitive training can occur even in absence of active stimulation. Future tDCS studies should consider how treatment expectations may be a source of the placebo effect in tDCS research, and identify ways to potentially leverage them to maximize treatment benefit.

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.

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.

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.

The Social Epistemology of Clinical Placebos.

Many extant theories of placebo focus on their causal structure wherein placebo effects are those that originate from select features of the therapy (e.g., client expectations or "incidental" features like size and shape). Although such accounts can distinguish placebos from standard medical treatments, they cannot distinguish placebos from everyday occurrences, for example, when positive feedback improves our performance on a task. Providing a social-epistemological account of a treatment context can rule out such occurrences, and furthermore reveal a new way to distinguish clinical placebos from standard medical treatments.

The Placebo Effect on Tinnitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the placebo effect in randomized clinical trials treating tinnitus with oral or intratympanic placebo treatment. DATA SOURCES: CINAHL, PubMed, and Scopus were searched for articles from conception to October 2022. MESH and key terms such as "tinnitus," "placebo," and "medication" were used to find randomized, placebo-controlled trials. The search was limited to articles in English. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials with adult subjects evaluating tinnitus pretreatment and posttreatment with an oral or intratympanic medication versus a placebo arm were included. Crossover studies, studies involving middle/inner ear operations or devices, and studies that exclusively included nonidiopathic etiologies of tinnitus were excluded. Mean tinnitus symptom survey scores for the Tinnitus Handicap Inventory (THI), Tinnitus Severity Index, Tinnitus Functional Index, Tinnitus Handicap Questionnaire, and Visual Analog Scales for tinnitus Intensity/Loudness (VAS-L), Annoyance (VAS-An), and Awareness (VAS-Aw) were extracted for both placebo and experimental groups. RESULTS: 953 studies were screened with 23 studies being included in the final analysis. Meta-analysis of mean difference (MD) was calculated using RevMan 5.4. MD between pretreatment and posttreatment THI scores of the placebo arms was 5.6 (95% confidence interval, 3.3-8.0; p < 0.001). MD between pretreatment and posttreatment VAS scores of the placebo groups for Loudness, Annoyance, and Awareness were 0.8 (0.0 to 1.6, p = 0.05), 0.2 (-0.2 to 0.5, p = 0.34), and 0.3 (-0.0 to 0.7, p = 0.08), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Placebo treatment has shown effectiveness in improving patient-reported evaluations of tinnitus when using some standardized metrics such as THI and VAS-L; however, the improvement is not as substantial as nonplacebo treatment.

Placebo and Nocebo Responses in Pharmacological Trials of Tic Disorders: A Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials of new drugs for tic disorders (TD) often fail to yield positive results. Placebo and nocebo responses play a vital role in interpreting the outcomes of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), yet these responses in RCTs of TD remain unexplored. OBJECTIVE: The aim was to assess the magnitude of placebo and nocebo responses in RCTs of pharmacological interventions for TD and identify influencing factors. METHODS: A systematic search of the Embase, Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PsycINFO databases was conducted. Eligible studies were RCTs that compared active pharmacological agents with placebos. Placebo response was defined as the change from baseline in TD symptom severity in the placebo group, and nocebo response as the proportion experiencing adverse events (AEs) in this group. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were performed to explore modifying factors. RESULTS: Twenty-four trials involving 2222 participants were included in this study. A substantial placebo response in TD symptom severity was identified, with a pooled effect size of -0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.99 to -0.59; I2 = 67%). Forty-four percent (95% CI 27% to 63%; I2 = 92%) of patients experienced AEs while taking inert pills. Sample size, study design, and randomization ratio were correlated with changes in placebo and nocebo responses. CONCLUSION: There were considerable placebo and nocebo responses in TD clinical trials. These results are of great relevance for the design of future trials and for clinical practice in TD. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration ID CRD42023388397. © 2024 The Authors. Movement Disorders published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.

Mapping expectancy-based appetitive placebo effects onto the brain in women.

Suggestions about hunger can generate placebo effects on hunger experiences. But, the underlying neurocognitive mechanisms are unknown. Here, we show in 255 women that hunger expectancies, induced by suggestion-based placebo interventions, determine hunger sensations and economic food choices. Functional magnetic resonance imaging in a subgroup (n = 57/255) provides evidence that the strength of expecting the placebo to decrease hunger moderates medial prefrontal cortex activation at the time of food choice and attenuates ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) responses to food value. Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex activation linked to interference resolution formally mediates the suggestion-based placebo effects on hunger. A drift-diffusion model characterizes this effect by showing that the hunger suggestions bias participants' food choices and how much they weigh tastiness against the healthiness of food, which further moderates vmPFC-dlPFC psychophysiological interactions when participants expect decreased hunger. Thus, suggestion-induced beliefs about hunger shape hunger addressing economic choices through cognitive regulation of value computation within the prefrontal cortex.

If only they knew! A non-inferiority randomized controlled trial comparing deceptive and open-label placebo in healthy individuals.

BACKGROUND: Placebo use is widespread in clinical practice. However, they are most often administered deceptively rather than openly. It is often suggested that open-label placebos (OLP) are less effective than deceptive placebos (DP). This study aimed to compare the use of DP and OLP treatments to reduce pain in healthy volunteers. METHODS: We conducted a non-inferiority, parallel, randomized, controlled trial, which also included a nested cross-over no-treatment condition. This study was conducted at a university clinic in France. RESULTS: We included 60 subjects and the main result shows that the OLP was not inferior to the DP by a margin of 10 mm. The mean difference between both groups regarding intensity of pain was 0.7 mm with a 95% compatibility interval (95% CI) of ]-∞; 5.4], and 97.5% CI of ]-∞; 6.3]. Secondary outcomes require cautious interpretation of the effect of placebo versus no treatment due to a time-treatment interaction. CONCLUSION: The study indicates that OLP may perform just as well as DP and could provide support for the use of OLP as an ethical alternative to DP when they are to be used in a clinical setting. If only patients knew about the placebo nature of some treatments they are receiving, unnecessary lies could be avoided while maintaining similar placebo effects. SIGNIFICANCE: This study is the first to show non-inferiority of placebos administered honestly, also called OLP, compared to DP in reducing pain. This suggests that OLP could be as effective as their deceptive counterparts while having the ethical advantage of not being required to lie. If deception is not a necessary condition for efficacy, OLP should be preferred over DP.

Comparison of low-level laser therapy and standard treatment for temporomandibular disorders: An assessment of therapeutic and placebo effects.

BACKGROUND: Despite extensive research on the use of low-power lasers for TMD treatment, the extent of their effectiveness remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the therapeutic or placebo effect of LLLT for TMD, and to compare it with standard treatment methods. A unique aspect of this study was the inclusion of a control group that received only standard treatment, allowing for an assessment of the placebo effect of LLLT. METHODS: A total of 42 patients with TMD were referred to Kerman Dental School Pain Clinic and were randomly assigned to three groups: group A received LLLT, group B was a placebo group and group C was a control group that received only standard treatment. The laser groups received gallium-aluminium-arsenide laser treatment twice a week for 10 sessions. Patients' jaw movement rate indicators and VAS index were evaluated at the start of treatment, and indicators were re-recorded every week for 5 weeks. SPSS 21 was used for statistical analysis, including ANOVA and Tukey's post hoc tests for inter-group comparisons. The repeated measurement test was used to analyse the data. RESULTS: All groups showed significant improvement in VAS indicators (p = .0001), lateral jaw movements (p = .0001), forward jaw movement (p = .007) but not for maximum mouth opening. No significant difference was observed between the groups at the end of the study (p = .000). CONCLUSION: Our study provides insights into LLLT's effectiveness for TMD, suggesting it cannot replace standard treatment alone. These findings contribute to the literature and emphasise the importance of including a control group in future studies to assess the placebo effect of LLLT.

Placebo Hypoalgesia and Nocebo Hyperalgesia Induced by Observational Learning May Be Difficult to Disentangle in a Laboratory Setting.

Observational learning (OBL) (seeing pain/pain treatment in others) can evoke placebo hypoalgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia. Data that compare these effects and illuminates the role of expectations and empathy are scarce. Healthy participants (n = 105) were randomized to: 1) placebo OBL, 2) nocebo OBL, or 3) no-observation control group. OBL consisted of a model simulating pain relief or increase after a sham ointment was applied to one arm. Pain was evoked with thermal stimuli on both arms (ointment, contralateral) at baseline and postobservation. Expectations, pain ratings, and physiological data (eg, skin conductance level) were collected. A 3 × 2 × 2 (Group × Arm × Phase) mixed analyses of variance revealed a 3-way interaction that confirmed that OBL modulates pain: F(2, 93) = 6.08, P = .003, ηp2 = .12. Significant baseline-to-post-observation pain increases were shown in the nocebo OBL group, with a bigger increase for the arm with ointment (both P ≤ .007). In the placebo OBL group, pain was higher for the contralateral relative to the ointment arm (P < .001). Baseline-to-post-observation pain increase was significant for the contralateral arm (P < .001). Expectation mediated these effects. Skin conductance level decreased over time during ointment trials in the nocebo OBL group, suggesting reduced physiological arousal. The findings illustrate that OBL modulates pain through expectations. In the placebo OBL group, the pain did not decrease for the ointment but increased for the contralateral stimuli, which may reflect nocebo learning. Experimental OBL paradigms typically examine relative differences between ointment and contralateral cues. This can complicate disentangling placebo hypoalgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia in laboratory settings. Implications for existing theories are discussed. PERSPECTIVE: Data that systematically compare placebo hypoalgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia induced by OBL are scarce. The current work illustrates that these effects may be more difficult to disentangle than previously assumed, which could have implications for existing theories on OBL and placebo effects and their translation to clinical practice.

Clinical Phenotypes Supporting the Relationship Between Sleep Disturbance and Impairment of Placebo Effects.

Lack of good sleep or insomnia can lead to many health issues, including an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, obesity, fatigue, low mood, and pain. While chronic pain negatively impacts sleep quality, the relationship between descending pain modulatory systems like placebo effects and sleep quality is not thoroughly known. We addressed this aspect in a cross-sectional study in participants with chronic pain. Placebo effects were elicited in a laboratory setting using thermal heat stimulations delivered with visual cues using classical conditioning and verbal suggestions. We estimated the levels of insomnia severity with the Insomnia Severity Index and the sleep quality with the Pittsburg Sleep Quality Index. The previous night's sleep continuity was assessed as total sleep time, sleep efficiency, and sleep midpoint the night before the experiment. 277 people with chronic pain and 189 pain-free control individuals participated. Participants with chronic pain and insomnia showed smaller placebo effects than those with chronic pain without insomnia. Similarly, poor sleep quality was associated with reduced placebo effects among participants with chronic pain. Clinical anxiety measured by Depression Anxiety Stress Scales partially mediated these effects. In contrast, placebo effects were not influenced by the presence of insomnia or poor sleep quality in pain-free participants. Sleep continuity the night before the experiment did not influence the placebo effects. Our results indicate that participants who experience insomnia and/or poor sleep quality and chronic pain have smaller placebo effects, and that the previous night sleep continuity does not influence the magnitude of placebo effects. PERSPECTIVE: This study examined the relationship between sleep disturbances and experimentally induced placebo effects. We found that individuals with chronic pain who experience insomnia and poor sleep quality demonstrated reduced placebo effects compared to their counterparts with good sleep quality and no insomnia.

The Nocebo Effect.

Adverse nocebo responses can cause harm to patients and interfere with treatment adherence and effects in both clinic practice and clinical trials. Nocebo responses refer to negative outcomes to active medical treatments in clinical trials or practice that cannot be explained by the treatment's pharmacologic effects. Negative expectancies and nocebo effects are less known than placebo responses. Nocebo effects can be triggered by verbal suggestions, prior negative experiences, observation of others experiencing negative outcomes, and other contextual and environmental factors. As research advances over the years, mechanistic knowledge is accumulating on the neurobiological mechanisms of nocebo effects. This review summarizes studies on different facets of nocebo effects and responses and discusses clinical implications, ethical considerations, and future directions.

Placebo and nocebo responses in painful diabetic neuropathy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT: This preregistered (CRD42021223379) systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to characterize the placebo and nocebo responses in placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCTs) on painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN), updating the previous literature by a decade. Four databases were searched for PDN trials published in the past 20 years, testing oral medications, adopting a parallel-group design. Magnitude of placebo or nocebo responses, Cochrane risk of bias, heterogeneity, and moderators were evaluated. Searches identified 21 studies (2425 placebo-treated patients). The overall mean pooled placebo response was -1.54 change in the pain intensity from baseline [95% confidence interval (CI): -1.52, -1.56, I 2 = 72], with a moderate effect size (Cohen d = 0.72). The pooled placebo 50% response rate was 25% [95% CI: 22, 29, I 2 = 50%]. The overall percentage of patients with adverse events (AEs) in the placebo arms was 53.3% [95% CI: 50.9, 55.7], with 5.1% [95% CI: 4.2, 6] of patients dropping out due to AEs. The year of study initiation was the only significant moderator of placebo response (regression coefficient = -0.06, [95% CI: -0.10, -0.02, P = 0.007]). More recent RCTs tended to be longer, bigger, and to include older patients (N = 21, rs = 0.455, P = 0.038, rs = 0.600, P = 0.004, rs = 0.472, P = 0.031, respectively). Our findings confirm the magnitude of placebo and nocebo responses, identify the year of study initiation as the only significant moderator of placebo response, draw attention to contextual factors such as confidence in PDN treatments, patients' previous negative experiences, intervention duration, and information provided to patients before enrollment.

Predictors of Placebo Response to Local (Intra-Articular) Therapy In Osteoarthritis: An Individual Participant Data Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: We undertook this study to evaluate potential predictors of placebo response with intra-articular (IA) injections for knee/hip osteoarthritis (OA) using individual participant data (IPD) from existing trials. METHODS: Randomized placebo-controlled trials evaluating IA glucocorticoid or hyaluronic acid published to September 2018 were selected. IPD for disease characteristics and outcome measures were acquired. Potential predictors of placebo response included participant characteristics, pain severity, intervention, and trial design. Placebo response was defined as at least a 20% reduction in baseline pain. Logistic regression models and odds ratios were computed as effect measures to evaluate patient and pain mechanisms and then pooled using a random effects model. Generalized mixed-effect models were applied to intervention and trial characteristics. RESULTS: Of 56 eligible trials, 6 shared data, and these were combined with the existing 4 OA Trial Bank studies, yielding 10 studies with IPD of 621 placebo participants for analysis. In the total placebo population, at short-term follow-up, the use of local anesthetic and ultrasound guidance were associated with reduced odds of placebo response. At midterm follow-up, mid- to long-term trial duration was associated with increased odds of placebo response, and worse baseline function scores were associated with reduced odds of a placebo response. CONCLUSION: The administration of local anesthetics or ultrasound guidance may reduce IA placebo response at short-term follow-up. At midterm follow-up, participants with worse baseline function scores may be less likely to respond to IA placebo, and mid- to long-term trial duration may enhance the placebo response. Further studies are required to corroborate these potential predictors of IA placebo response.

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.