Placebo analgesia in physical and psychological interventions: Systematic review and meta‐analysis of three‐armed trials

Author:

Hohenschurz‐Schmidt David12ORCID,Phalip Jules34ORCID,Chan Jessica5,Gauhe Greta6ORCID,Soliman Nadia1ORCID,Vollert Jan1789ORCID,Lunde Sigrid Juhl10ORCID,Vase Lene10ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Pain Research, Department of Surgery and Cancer Imperial College London London UK

2. Research Department University College of Osteopathy London UK

3. Institut ANALGESIA Faculté de Médecine, Université Clermont Auvergne Clermont‐Ferrand France

4. CHU Clermont‐Ferrand, Inserm 1107 Neuro‐Dol, Service de pharmacologie médicale Université Clermont Auvergne Clermont‐Ferrand France

5. Faculty of Medicine Imperial College London London UK

6. Centre for Dance Research Coventry University Coventry UK

7. Division of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology University Hospital of Schleswig‐Holstein Kiel Germany

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

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

10. Department of Psychology and Behavioural Sciences, School of Business and Social Sciences Aarhus University Aarhus Denmark

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundThe magnitude of placebo effects from physical and psychological ‘sham’ is unknown but could impact efficacy trials and treatment understanding. To quantify placebo effects, this systematic review of three‐armed randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of physical and psychological interventions for pain compared outcomes in ‘sham’ control intervention and non‐exposure arms.MethodsRCTs with treatment, ‘sham’ control intervention, and non‐exposure groups were included, enrolling adults with any pain. A protocol was pre‐registered (PROSPERO: CRD42023413324), and twelve databases searched from 2008 to July 2023. Trial methods and blinding were analysed descriptively and risk of bias assessed. Meta‐analysis of pain measures at short‐, medium‐ and long‐term was performed with random‐effects models of standardised mean differences (SMD).Studies were sub‐grouped according to control intervention type.ResultsSeventeen RCTs were included. The average short‐term placebo effect was small (0.21 SMD, 0.1–0.33 95% CI, p = 0.0002, 1440 participants). It showed no heterogeneity (Tau2 = 0.1, I2 = 11%, p = 0.3), preventing meta‐regression analyses of effect modifiers. However, sub‐group analyses revealed larger placebo effects in manual control interventions compared to disabled devices and miscellaneous control interventions. Overall, placebo analgesia accounted for 39% of treatments’ short‐term effectiveness. No placebo effects were found at medium‐term (7 RCTs, 381 participants) or long‐term follow‐up (3 RCTs, 173 participants).ConclusionsThe observed placebo analgesia has mechanistic and methodological implications, though its clinical importance may be limited. Control intervention design affects placebo effects, highlighting the importance of considering methodology in RCT interpretation. Review limitations include a small number of long‐term studies and sample heterogeneity.SignificanceThis systematic review directly quantifies placebo effects from physical and psychological ‘sham’ control interventions and compares them to treatments’ overall effectiveness. By doing so, the review enhances our understanding of placebo effects, their relative contribution in clinical trials, and their susceptibly to trial design. It poses further questions regarding the influence of blinding, participant expectations, and features of the therapeutic context. Overall, the insights provided by this review carry methodological significance and are important for the interpretation and synthesis of efficacy trials in this field.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

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