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.
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.