Placebo

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
(Redirected from
Placebo effect
)
For other uses, see Placebo (disambiguation).
Placebos are typically inert tablets, such as sugar pills.

A placebo (/pləˈsiːboʊ/ plə-SEE-boh) can be roughly defined as a sham medical treatment.[1] Common placebos include inert tablets (like sugar pills), inert injections (like saline), sham surgery,[2] and other procedures.[3]

Placebos are used in randomized clinical trials to test the efficacy of medical treatments, so they serve as epistemological tools to screen out the ‘noise’ of clinical research. Placebos in clinical trials should ideally be indistinguishable from so-called verum treatments under investigation, except for the latter’s particular hypothesized remedial factor(s).[4] This is to prevent the recipient or others from knowing (with their consent) whether a treatment is active or inactive, as expectations about efficacy can influence results.[5][6]

Placebos are also popular because they can sometimes produce relief through psychological mechanisms (a phenomenon known as the "placebo effect"). They can affect how patients perceive their condition and encourage the body's chemical processes for relieving pain[7] and a few other symptoms,[8] but have no impact on the disease itself.[9][7]

Improvements that patients experience after being treated with a placebo can also be due to unrelated factors, such as

regression to the mean (a statistical effect where an unusually high or low measurement is likely to be followed by a less extreme one).[7] The use of placebos in clinical medicine raises ethical concerns, especially if they are disguised as an active treatment, as this introduces dishonesty into the doctor–patient relationship and bypasses informed consent.[10]

In a placebo-controlled clinical trial any change in the control group is known as the placebo response, and the difference between this and the result of no treatment is the placebo effect.[11] Some researchers now recommend comparing the experimental treatment with an existing treatment when possible, instead of a placebo.[12]

The idea of a placebo effect was discussed in 18th century psychology,[13] but became more prominent in the 20th century. Modern studies find that placebos can affect some outcomes such as pain and nausea, but otherwise do not generally have important clinical effects.[9]

Etymology

Placebo (pronounced /plaˈkebo/ or /plaˈt͡ʃebo) is Latin for [I] shall be pleasing. It was used as a name for the Vespers in the Office of the Dead, taken from its incipit, a quote from the Vulgate's Psalm 116:9, placēbō Dominō in regiōne vīvōrum, "[I] shall please the Lord in the land of the living."[14][15][16] From that, a singer of placebo became associated with someone who falsely claimed a connection to the deceased to get a share of the funeral meal, and hence a flatterer, and so a deceptive act to please.[17]

Definitions

The definition of placebo has been debated.

treatment process is a placebo when none of the characteristic treatment factors are effective (remedial or harmful) in the patient for a given disease.[citation needed
]

In a clinical trial, a placebo response is the measured response of subjects to a placebo; the placebo effect is the difference between that response and no treatment.[11] The placebo response may include improvements due to natural healing, declines due to natural disease progression, the tendency for people who were temporarily feeling either better or worse than usual to return to their average situations (regression toward the mean), and errors in the clinical trial records, which can make it appear that a change has happened when nothing has changed.[19] It is also part of the recorded response to any active medical intervention.[20]

Measurable placebo effects may be either objective (e.g. lowered blood pressure) or subjective (e.g. a lowered perception of pain).[1]

Effects

"Placebo effect" redirects here. For other uses, see Placebo effect (disambiguation).
Further information: Alternative medicine § Perceived mechanism of effect

Placebos can improve patient-reported outcomes such as

Cochrane Collaboration meta-analysis of the placebo effect looked at trials in 40 different medical conditions, and concluded the only one where it had been shown to have a significant effect was for pain.[22] Another Cochrane review in 2010 suggested that placebo effects are apparent only in subjective, continuous measures, and in the treatment of pain and related conditions. The review found that placebos do not appear to affect the actual diseases, or outcomes that are not dependent on a patient's perception. The authors, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson and Peter C. Gøtzsche, concluded that their study "did not find that placebo interventions have important clinical effects in general".[9] This interpretation has been subject to criticism, as the existence of placebo effects seems undeniable.[23][24][25][26][27] For example, recent research has linked placebo interventions to improved motor functions in patients with Parkinson's disease.[8][28][29] Other objective outcomes affected by placebos include immune and endocrine parameters,[30][31] end-organ functions regulated by the autonomic nervous system,[32] and sport performance.[33]

Placebos are believed to be capable of altering a person's perception of pain. According to the American Cancer Society, "A person might reinterpret a sharp pain as uncomfortable tingling."[7]

Measuring the extent of the placebo effect is difficult due to confounding factors.[34] For example, a patient may feel better after taking a placebo due to regression to the mean (i.e. a natural recovery or change in symptoms),[35][36][37] but this can be ruled out by comparing the placebo group with a no treatment group (as all the placebo research does). It is harder still to tell the difference between the placebo effect and the effects of response bias, observer bias and other flaws in trial methodology, as a trial comparing placebo treatment and no treatment will not be a blinded experiment.[9][35] In their 2010 meta-analysis of the placebo effect, Asbjørn Hróbjartsson and Peter C. Gøtzsche argue that "even if there were no true effect of placebo, one would expect to record differences between placebo and no-treatment groups due to bias associated with lack of blinding".[9]

One way in which the magnitude of placebo

analgesia can be measured is by conducting "open/hidden" studies, in which some patients receive an analgesic and are informed that they will be receiving it (open), while others are administered the same drug without their knowledge (hidden). Such studies have found that analgesics are considerably more effective when the patient knows they are receiving them.[38]

Factors influencing the power of the placebo effect

A review published in JAMA Psychiatry found that, in trials of antipsychotic medications, the change in response to receiving a placebo had increased significantly between 1960 and 2013. The review's authors identified several factors that could be responsible for this change, including inflation of baseline scores and enrollment of fewer severely ill patients.[39] Another analysis published in Pain in 2015 found that placebo responses had increased considerably in neuropathic pain clinical trials conducted in the United States from 1990 to 2013. The researchers suggested that this may be because such trials have "increased in study size and length" during this time period.[40]

adults to placebos.[41]

The administration of the placebos can determine the placebo effect strength. Studies have found that taking more pills would strengthen the effect. Capsules appear to be more influential than pills, and injections are even stronger than capsules.[42]

Some studies have investigated the use of placebos where the patient is fully aware that the treatment is inert, known as an open-label placebo. Clinical trials found that open-label placebos may have positive effects in comparison to no treatment, which may open new avenues for treatments,[43] but a review of such trials noted that they were done with a small number of participants and hence should be interpreted with "caution" until further, better-controlled trials are conducted.[44] An updated 2021 systematic review and meta-analysis based on 11 studies also found a significant, albeit slightly smaller overall effect of open-label placebos, while noting that "research on OLPs is still in its infancy".[45]

If the person dispensing the placebo shows their care towards the patient, is friendly and sympathetic, or has a high expectation of a treatment's success, then the placebo is more effectual.[42]

In the 2022 book Epigenetics and Anticipation published by Springer, Goli integrates many of the specific and non-specific factors influencing the placebo effect in the perceived healing response formula, developed based on main placebo studies.[46][relevant?]

Depression

In 2008, a controversial meta-analysis led by psychologist Irving Kirsch, analyzing data from the FDA, concluded that 82% of the response to antidepressants was accounted for by placebos.[47] However, there are serious doubts about the used methods and the interpretation of the results, especially the use of 0.5 as the cut-off point for the effect size.[48] A complete reanalysis and recalculation based on the same FDA data discovered that the Kirsch study had "important flaws in the calculations". The authors concluded that although a large percentage of the placebo response was due to expectancy, this was not true for the active drug. Besides confirming drug effectiveness, they found that the drug effect was not related to depression severity.[49]

Another meta-analysis found that 79% of depressed patients receiving placebo remained well (for 12 weeks after an initial 6–8 weeks of successful therapy) compared to 93% of those receiving antidepressants. In the continuation phase however, patients on placebo relapsed significantly more often than patients on antidepressants.[50]

Negative effects

Main article: Nocebo

A phenomenon opposite to the placebo effect has also been observed. When an inactive substance or treatment is administered to a recipient who has an expectation of it having a negative impact, this intervention is known as a nocebo (Latin nocebo = "I shall harm").[51] A nocebo effect occurs when the recipient of an inert substance reports a negative effect or a worsening of symptoms, with the outcome resulting not from the substance itself, but from negative expectations about the treatment.[52][53]

Another negative consequence is that placebos can cause

side-effects associated with real treatment.[54]

Withdrawal symptoms can also occur after placebo treatment. This was found, for example, after the discontinuation of the

hormone replacement therapy for menopause. Women had been on placebo for an average of 5.7 years. Moderate or severe withdrawal symptoms were reported by 4.8% of those on placebo compared to 21.3% of those on hormone replacement.[55]

Ethics

See also: Medical ethics and Philosophy of medicine

In research trials

Knowingly giving a person a placebo when there is an effective treatment available is a bioethically complex issue. While placebo-controlled trials might provide information about the effectiveness of a treatment, it denies some patients what could be the best available (if unproven) treatment. Informed consent is usually required for a study to be considered ethical, including the disclosure that some test subjects will receive placebo treatments.

The ethics of placebo-controlled studies have been debated in the revision process of the Declaration of Helsinki. Of particular concern has been the difference between trials comparing inert placebos with experimental treatments, versus comparing the best available treatment with an experimental treatment; and differences between trials in the sponsor's developed countries versus the trial's targeted developing countries.[56]

Some suggest that existing medical treatments should be used instead of placebos, to avoid having some patients not receive medicine during the trial.[12]

In medical practice

The practice of doctors prescribing placebos that are disguised as real medication is controversial. A chief concern is that it is deceptive and could harm the doctor–patient relationship in the long run. While some say that blanket consent, or the general consent to unspecified treatment given by patients beforehand, is ethical, others argue that patients should always obtain specific information about the name of the drug they are receiving, its side effects, and other treatment options.[57] This view is shared by some on the grounds of patient autonomy.[58] There are also concerns that legitimate doctors and pharmacists could open themselves up to charges of fraud or malpractice by using a placebo.[59] Critics also argued that using placebos can delay the proper diagnosis and treatment of serious medical conditions.[60]

Despite the abovementioned issues, 60% of surveyed physicians and head nurses reported using placebos in an Israeli study, with only 5% of respondents stating that placebo use should be strictly prohibited.[61] A British Medical Journal editorial said, "that a patient gets pain relief from a placebo does not imply that the pain is not real or organic in origin ...the use of the placebo for 'diagnosis' of whether or not pain is real is misguided."[62] A survey in the United States of more than 10,000 physicians came to the result that while 24% of physicians would prescribe a treatment that is a placebo simply because the patient wanted treatment, 58% would not, and for the remaining 18%, it would depend on the circumstances.[63]

Referring specifically to homeopathy, the House of Commons of the United Kingdom Science and Technology Committee has stated:

In the Committee's view, homeopathy is a placebo treatment and the Government should have a policy on prescribing placebos. The Government is reluctant to address the appropriateness and ethics of prescribing placebos to patients, which usually relies on some degree of patient deception. Prescribing of placebos is not consistent with informed patient choice—which the Government claims is very important—as it means patients do not have all the information needed to make choice meaningful. A further issue is that the placebo effect is unreliable and unpredictable.[64]

In his 2008 book Bad Science, Ben Goldacre argues that instead of deceiving patients with placebos, doctors should use the placebo effect to enhance effective medicines.[65] Edzard Ernst has argued similarly that "As a good doctor you should be able to transmit a placebo effect through the compassion you show your patients."[66] In an opinion piece about homeopathy, Ernst argues that it is wrong to support alternative medicine on the basis that it can make patients feel better through the placebo effect.[67] His concerns are that it is deceitful and that the placebo effect is unreliable.[67] Goldacre also concludes that the placebo effect does not justify alternative medicine, arguing that unscientific medicine could lead to patients not receiving prevention advice.[65] Placebo researcher Fabrizio Benedetti also expresses concern over the potential for placebos to be used unethically, warning that there is an increase in "quackery" and that an "alternative industry that preys on the vulnerable" is developing.[68]

Mechanisms

The mechanism for how placebos could have effects is uncertain. From a sociocognitive perspective, intentional placebo response is attributed to the “ritual effect” that induces anticipation for transition to a better state.

heart rhythm and blood pressure, but when administered as a depressant, the opposite effect.[70]

Psychology

The subjective effects of placebos may be related to expectations, yet similar effects have been noted in open-label studies.

In psychology, the two main hypotheses of the placebo effect are expectancy theory and classical conditioning.[71]

In 1985, Irving Kirsch hypothesized that placebo effects are produced by the self-fulfilling effects of response expectancies, in which the belief that one will feel different leads a person to actually feel different.[72] According to this theory, the belief that one has received an active treatment can produce the subjective changes thought to be produced by the real treatment. Similarly, the appearance of effect can result from classical conditioning, wherein a placebo and an actual stimulus are used simultaneously until the placebo is associated with the effect from the actual stimulus.[73] Both conditioning and expectations play a role in placebo effect,[71] and make different kinds of contributions. Conditioning has a longer-lasting effect,[74] and can affect earlier stages of information processing.[75] Those who think a treatment will work display a stronger placebo effect than those who do not, as evidenced by a study of acupuncture.[76]

Additionally, motivation may contribute to the placebo effect. The active goals of an individual changes their somatic experience by altering the detection and interpretation of expectation-congruent symptoms, and by changing the behavioral strategies a person pursues.[77] Motivation may link to the meaning through which people experience illness and treatment. Such meaning is derived from the culture in which they live and which informs them about the nature of illness and how it responds to treatment.[citation needed]

Placebo analgesia

periaqueductal gray matter,[78][79] and the spinal cord.[80][81][82]

Since 1978, it has been known that placebo analgesia depends upon the release of

endogenous opioids in the brain.[83] Such analgesic placebos activation changes processing lower down in the brain by enhancing the descending inhibition through the periaqueductal gray on spinal nociceptive reflexes, while the expectations of anti-analgesic nocebos acts in the opposite way to block this.[80]

Functional imaging upon placebo analgesia has been summarized as showing that the placebo response is "mediated by "top-down" processes dependent on frontal cortical areas that generate and maintain cognitive expectancies.

Dopaminergic reward pathways may underlie these expectancies".[84] "Diseases lacking major 'top-down' or cortically based regulation may be less prone to placebo-related improvement".[85]

Brain and body

Further information: Neural top–down control of physiology

In conditioning, a neutral stimulus

immunosuppression. After learning this pairing, the taste of saccharin by itself is able to cause immunosuppression, as a new conditioned response via neural top-down control.[86] Such conditioning has been found to affect a diverse variety of not just basic physiological processes in the immune system but ones such as serum iron levels, oxidative DNA damage levels, and insulin secretion. Recent reviews have argued that the placebo effect is due to top-down control by the brain for immunity[31] and pain.[87] Pacheco-López and colleagues have raised the possibility of "neocortical-sympathetic-immune axis providing neuroanatomical substrates that might explain the link between placebo/conditioned and placebo/expectation responses".[31]: 441  There has also been research aiming to understand underlying neurobiological mechanisms of action in pain relief, immunosuppression, Parkinson's disease and depression.[88]

Dopaminergic pathways have been implicated in the placebo response in pain and depression.[89]

Confounding factors

Placebo-controlled studies, as well as studies of the placebo effect itself, often fail to adequately identify confounding factors.[7][90] False impressions of placebo effects are caused by many factors including:[7][35][90][71][91]

  • Regression to the mean
    (natural recovery or fluctuation of symptoms)
  • Additional treatments
  • Response bias from subjects, including scaling bias, answers of politeness, experimental subordination, conditioned answers;
  • Reporting bias from experimenters, including misjudgment and irrelevant response variables.
  • Non-inert ingredients of the placebo medication having an unintended physical effect

History

Main article: Placebo in history
Perkins Patent Tractors by James Gillray, 1801. John Haygarth
used this remedy to illustrate the power of the placebo effect.

The word placebo was used in a medicinal context in the late 18th century to describe a "commonplace method or medicine" and in 1811 it was defined as "any medicine adapted more to please than to benefit the patient". Although this definition contained a derogatory implication[17] it did not necessarily imply that the remedy had no effect.[92]

It was recognized in the 18th and 19th centuries that drugs or remedies often were perceived to work best while they were still novel:[93]

We know that, in Paris, fashion imposes its dictates on medicine just as it does with everything else. Well, at one time, pyramidal elm bark[94] had a great reputation; it was taken as a powder, as an extract, as an elixir, even in baths. It was good for the nerves, the chest, the stomach—what can I say?— it was a true panacea. At the peak of the fad, one of Bouvard's [sic] patients asked him if it might not be a good idea to take some: "Take it, Madame", he replied, "and hurry up while it [still] cures." [dépêchez-vous pendant qu'elle guérit]

— Gaston de Lévis quoting Michel-Philippe Bouvart in the 1780s[95]

Placebos have featured in medical use until well into the twentieth century.

regression to the mean.[35][34][97]

Placebo-controlled studies

Main article: Placebo-controlled study

The placebo effect makes it more difficult to evaluate new treatments. Clinical trials control for this effect by including a group of subjects that receives a sham treatment. The subjects in such trials are blinded as to whether they receive the treatment or a placebo. If a person is given a placebo under one name, and they respond, they will respond in the same way on a later occasion to that placebo under that name but not if under another.[98]

Clinical trials are often double-blinded so that the researchers also do not know which test subjects are receiving the active or placebo treatment. The placebo effect in such clinical trials is weaker than in normal therapy since the subjects are not sure whether the treatment they are receiving is active.[99]

See also

References

  1. ^
    PMID 28375723
    .
  2. ^ Gottlieb S (18 February 2014). "The FDA Wants You for Sham Surgery". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 8 January 2015.
  3. S2CID 36092163
    .
  4. ISSN 0169-3867
    .
  5. ^ "placebo". Dictionary.com. 9 April 2016. Retrieved 21 January 2017.
  6. ^ "placebo". TheFreeDictionary.com. Retrieved 21 January 2017.
  7. ^ a b c d e f "Placebo Effect". American Cancer Society. 10 April 2015. Archived from the original on 2020-05-22. Retrieved 2021-06-27.
  8. ^
    S2CID 52294141
    .
  9. ^
    PMID 20091554. Archived from the original
    (PDF) on 2019-04-02. Retrieved 2018-06-25.
  10. ISBN 978-1-4165-5153-9
    .
  11. ^
    S2CID 72626022
    .
  12. ^
    PMID 10768689
    .
  13. ^ Schwarz, K. A., & Pfister, R.: Scientific psychology in the 18th century: a historical rediscovery. In: Perspectives on Psychological Science, Nr. 11, pp. 399–407.
  14. ^ "Placebo (origins of technical term)". TheFreeDictionary.com. Retrieved 2021-02-07.
  15. ^ Psalms 114:9
  16. PMID 10844895
    .
  17. ^
    S2CID 2733947
    .
  18. S2CID 254281187
    .
  19. S2CID 220633770
    .
  20. PMID 12099783
    .
  21. PMID 17666008
    . Retrieved 17 March 2022.
  22. ^
    PMID 11372012
    .
  23. S2CID 5790594
    .
  24. PMID 11680452
    .
  25. ^ "APA PsycNet". psycnet.apa.org. Retrieved 2023-09-16.
  26. PMID 17279527
    .
  27. PMID 15827993
    .
  28. PMID 28222121
    .
  29. S2CID 24556504
    .
  30. S2CID 40594851
    .
  31. ^
    S2CID 11897104
    .
  32. PMID 21576138
    .
  33. S2CID 199662279
    .
  34. ^
    S2CID 21244034
    . Gøtzsche's biographical article has further references related to this work.
  35. ^
    PMID 9449934
    .
  36. PMID 6369471
    .
  37. PMID 15333621
    .
  38. PMID 17550344
    .
  39. PMID 25321611
    .
  40. S2CID 23246031
    .
  41. PMID 18700812
    .
  42. ^
    ISBN 978-1-4292-6356-6
    . Retrieved 7 December 2020.
  43. PMID 31243047
    .
  44. S2CID 4577402
    .
  45. PMID 33594150
    .
  46. ISBN 978-3-031-17677-7
  47. PMID 18303940
    .
  48. PMID 18319297
    .
  49. PMID 20800012
    .
  50. PMID 18036616
    .
  51. ^ "nocebo". Mirriam-Webster Incorporated. Retrieved 22 January 2017.
  52. PMID 22833756
    .
  53. ^ "The Nocebo Effect". Priory.com. 10 February 2007. Retrieved 2009-07-08.
  54. ^ Shapiro AK, Chassan J, Morris LA, Frick R (1974). "Placebo induced side effects". Journal of Operational Psychiatry. 6: 43–6.
  55. PMID 16014592
    .
  56. PMID 20663001
    .
  57. S2CID 11300075
    .
  58. PMID 26021517
    .
  59. PMID 19353835
    . Retrieved 30 March 2018.
  60. PMID 17285788
    .
  61. PMID 15377572
    .
  62. PMID 15499085
    .
  63. ^ Doctors Struggle With Tougher-Than-Ever Dilemmas: Other Ethical Issues Author: Leslie Kane. 11/11/2010
  64. ^ UK Parliamentary Committee Science, Technology Committee. "Evidence Check 2: Homeopathy". Archived from the original on 2012-02-24.
  65. ^
    ISBN 978-0-00-724019-7
    .
  66. S2CID 3511158
    .
  67. ^ a b "No to homeopathy placebo". The Guardian. 22 February 2010. Retrieved 29 April 2019.
  68. S2CID 247265071
    . Retrieved 17 March 2022.
  69. ISBN 978-3-319-35091-2
  70. ISBN 978-0-674-66986-4
    .
  71. ^
    S2CID 10297875
    .
  72. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.40.11.1189
    .
  73. S2CID 40356035
    .
  74. S2CID 27747260
    .
  75. S2CID 27342664
    .
  76. S2CID 25561695
    .
  77. PMID 16162050
    .
  78. PMID 18567924
    .
  79. S2CID 28735246
    .
  80. ^
    S2CID 20841668
    .
  81. PMID 19784082
    .
  82. PMID 19338509
    .
  83. S2CID 45403755
    .
  84. S2CID 40020867
    .
  85. S2CID 29547923
    .
  86. S2CID 15306042
    .
  87. S2CID 9353193
    .
  88. PMID 16280578
    .
  89. PMID 23880289
    .
  90. ^
    PMID 21524568
    .
  91. S2CID 30068755
    .
  92. S2CID 34023318
    .
  93. ISBN 1421401347, chapter "The Placebo Effect in Medical History"
  94. Ulmus campestris: Simon Morelot, Cours élémentaire d'histoire naturelle pharmaceutique..., 1800, p. 349 "the elm, pompously named pyramidal...it had an ephemeral reputation"; Georges Dujardin-Beaumetz, Formulaire pratique de thérapeutique et de pharmacologie, 1893, p. 260
  95. ^ Gaston de Lévis, Souvenirs et portraits, 1780–1789, 1813, p. 240
  96. PMID 10692902
    .
  97. ^ Stoddart, Charlotte, How placebo effect went mainstream, Knowable Magazine, June 27, 2023
  98. PMID 18440407
    .
  99. S2CID 21391210
    .
  100. ISBN 978-0-19-955912-1
    .

Further reading

External links
Look up placebo in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.
Wikiquote has quotations related to Placebo effect.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Placebo&oldid=1218304168#Effects"