Placebo effect of verbal instructions coupled with pharmacological treatment: results from a randomized controlled trial in migraine patients.

IF 9 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Sara Romanazzo,Francesca Monti,Sara Ceccatelli,Francesco De Cesaris,Alberto Chiarugi,Fiammetta Cosci
{"title":"Placebo effect of verbal instructions coupled with pharmacological treatment: results from a randomized controlled trial in migraine patients.","authors":"Sara Romanazzo,Francesca Monti,Sara Ceccatelli,Francesco De Cesaris,Alberto Chiarugi,Fiammetta Cosci","doi":"10.1159/000548932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"INTRODUCTION\r\nVerbal instructions modulate the expectation concerning a given drug. Knowing that the prescribing clinician is positive and enthusiastic toward the prescribed treatment may lead to positive expectations. We tested whether administering strongly positive verbal instructions together with a pharmacological prescription might trigger a placebo effect in migraine patients.\r\n\r\nMETHODS\r\nOutpatients (n = 102) were randomly assigned to: (a) an experimental condition: the pharmacological prescription was coupled to strongly positive verbal instructions; (b) a control condition: the prescription was coupled to positive verbal instructions. Subjects were assessed before the prescription (T0), 7-day (T1), 15-day (T2), 1-month (T3), 2-month (T4), and 3-month after it (T5). At each assessment point, Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and two Numeric Rating Scales (NRSs) were proposed. Kellner's scale of change was administered at T1-T5.\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nPatients who received strongly positive instructions had no HIT decrease (p = 0.177; η2 = 0.034). Patients who received positive instructions had HIT decrease (p = 0.006; η2 = 0.770). No difference was found between the groups. No significant across timepoints change of expectations was observed in the group who received strongly positive instructions (p = 0.433; η2 = 0.021) or in the group who received positive instructions (p = 0.151; η2 = 0.037). Since the first group had a decrease across timepoints of the score while the second group had a peak at T2, difference between them was statistically significant (p = 0.029; η2 = 0.049).\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nStrongly positive verbal instructions did not produce placebo effect.","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":"14 1","pages":"1-17"},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000548932","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

INTRODUCTION Verbal instructions modulate the expectation concerning a given drug. Knowing that the prescribing clinician is positive and enthusiastic toward the prescribed treatment may lead to positive expectations. We tested whether administering strongly positive verbal instructions together with a pharmacological prescription might trigger a placebo effect in migraine patients. METHODS Outpatients (n = 102) were randomly assigned to: (a) an experimental condition: the pharmacological prescription was coupled to strongly positive verbal instructions; (b) a control condition: the prescription was coupled to positive verbal instructions. Subjects were assessed before the prescription (T0), 7-day (T1), 15-day (T2), 1-month (T3), 2-month (T4), and 3-month after it (T5). At each assessment point, Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) and two Numeric Rating Scales (NRSs) were proposed. Kellner's scale of change was administered at T1-T5. RESULTS Patients who received strongly positive instructions had no HIT decrease (p = 0.177; η2 = 0.034). Patients who received positive instructions had HIT decrease (p = 0.006; η2 = 0.770). No difference was found between the groups. No significant across timepoints change of expectations was observed in the group who received strongly positive instructions (p = 0.433; η2 = 0.021) or in the group who received positive instructions (p = 0.151; η2 = 0.037). Since the first group had a decrease across timepoints of the score while the second group had a peak at T2, difference between them was statistically significant (p = 0.029; η2 = 0.049). CONCLUSION Strongly positive verbal instructions did not produce placebo effect.
口头说明与药物治疗相结合的安慰剂效应:偏头痛患者随机对照试验的结果。
口头说明调节对某一药物的期望。知道开处方的临床医生对所规定的治疗是积极和热情的,可能会导致积极的期望。我们测试了是否给予强烈积极的口头指导和药物处方可能会引发偏头痛患者的安慰剂效应。方法102例门诊患者随机分配到:(a)实验条件:药物处方与强烈积极的口头指导相结合;(b)对照条件:处方与积极的口头指示相结合。分别于开药前(T0)、开药后7天(T1)、15天(T2)、开药后1个月(T3)、2个月(T4)、3个月(T5)对受试者进行评估。在每个评估点,提出头痛冲击测试(HIT-6)和两个数值评定量表(NRSs)。在t1 ~ t5阶段采用Kellner变化量表。结果接受强阳性指导的患者HIT无明显下降(p = 0.177; η2 = 0.034)。接受阳性指导的患者HIT降低(p = 0.006; η2 = 0.770)。两组之间没有发现差异。在接受强烈积极指导的组(p = 0.433; η2 = 0.021)和接受积极指导的组(p = 0.151; η2 = 0.037)中,期望在时间点上没有显著变化。由于第一组在各时间点评分均下降,而第二组在T2达到峰值,故两组间差异有统计学意义(p = 0.029; η2 = 0.049)。结论强烈积极的口头指导不产生安慰剂效应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics
Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
29.40
自引率
6.10%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics is a reputable journal that has been published since 1953. Over the years, it has gained recognition for its independence, originality, and methodological rigor. The journal has been at the forefront of research in psychosomatic medicine, psychotherapy research, and psychopharmacology, and has contributed to the development of new lines of research in these areas. It is now ranked among the world's most cited journals in the field. As the official journal of the International College of Psychosomatic Medicine and the World Federation for Psychotherapy, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics serves as a platform for discussing current and controversial issues and showcasing innovations in assessment and treatment. It offers a unique forum for cutting-edge thinking at the intersection of medical and behavioral sciences, catering to both practicing clinicians and researchers. The journal is indexed in various databases and platforms such as PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, Science Citation Index, Social Sciences Citation Index, Science Citation Index Expanded, BIOSIS Previews, Google Scholar, Academic Search, and Health Research Premium Collection, among others.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书