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

Author:

Frisaldi Elisa1ORCID,Vollert Jan2345ORCID,Al Sultani Husam6ORCID,Benedetti Fabrizio17ORCID,Shaibani Aziz68ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Rita Levi Montalcini Department of Neuroscience, University of Turin Medical School, Turin, Italy

2. Pain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom

3. Division of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany

4. Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University Hospital Muenster, Muenster, Germany

5. Neurophysiology, Mannheim Center of Translational Neuroscience (MCTN), Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, Germany

6. Nerve and Muscle Center of Texas, Houston, TX, United States

7. Medicine and Physiology of Hypoxia, Plateau Rosà, Switzerland

8. Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States

Abstract

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, I2 = 72], with a moderate effect size (Cohen d = 0.72). The pooled placebo 50% response rate was 25% [95% CI: 22, 29, I2 = 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, r s = 0.455, P = 0.038, r s = 0.600, P = 0.004, r s = 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.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Neurology (clinical),Neurology

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3