Treatment Expectation across Open-Label Placebo and Pharmacological Contexts: A Randomized Clinical Trial in Chronic Low Back Pain

IF 9 1区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Elisabeth Winkler,Julia Stuhlreyer,Antonia Borcherding,Johannes Wessels,Regine Klinger
{"title":"Treatment Expectation across Open-Label Placebo and Pharmacological Contexts: A Randomized Clinical Trial in Chronic Low Back Pain","authors":"Elisabeth Winkler,Julia Stuhlreyer,Antonia Borcherding,Johannes Wessels,Regine Klinger","doi":"10.1159/pps/aemag014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Chronic low back pain (CLBP) markedly reduces quality of life and remains difficult to treat. Increasing opioid prescriptions highlight the need for effective innovative approaches. This randomized controlled trial aims to investigate whether social observational learning augments analgesic or open-label placebo treatment through treatment expectation modulation in CLBP patients. Methods One hundred thirty patients with CLBP were randomized into a 2 × 2 fully balanced placebo design plus a natural history (NH) control group. Patients received a 3-week treatment with novamine sulfone (analgesic) or open-label placebos (OLP), with follow-up at 3 months. Expectations were manipulated before treatment, using a positive social observational learning video (SoL) or a neutral control video (neutral). Pain intensity (numeric rating scale, NRS 0–10) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included treatment expectations and functional capacity. Results Pain intensity decreased significantly over time in all treatment groups (p < .001), with the smallest reduction in NH. Pain reduction in OLP + SoL and in analgesic + neutral was significantly greater than NH (p < .05). Expectation manipulation produced significant group differences in expected pain relief (p < .05). Higher expected pain relief predicted greater pain reduction after 3 weeks and 3 months (both p < .001). Functional capacity improved over time (p < .001) without consistent group differences. Conclusion Open-label placebos combined with social observational learning produced clinically meaningful analgesia that did not significantly differ from active medication. Treatment expectation represents a key mechanism underlying pain relief in CLBP and calls for further investigation.","PeriodicalId":20744,"journal":{"name":"Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","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/pps/aemag014","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 Chronic low back pain (CLBP) markedly reduces quality of life and remains difficult to treat. Increasing opioid prescriptions highlight the need for effective innovative approaches. This randomized controlled trial aims to investigate whether social observational learning augments analgesic or open-label placebo treatment through treatment expectation modulation in CLBP patients. Methods One hundred thirty patients with CLBP were randomized into a 2 × 2 fully balanced placebo design plus a natural history (NH) control group. Patients received a 3-week treatment with novamine sulfone (analgesic) or open-label placebos (OLP), with follow-up at 3 months. Expectations were manipulated before treatment, using a positive social observational learning video (SoL) or a neutral control video (neutral). Pain intensity (numeric rating scale, NRS 0–10) was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included treatment expectations and functional capacity. Results Pain intensity decreased significantly over time in all treatment groups (p < .001), with the smallest reduction in NH. Pain reduction in OLP + SoL and in analgesic + neutral was significantly greater than NH (p < .05). Expectation manipulation produced significant group differences in expected pain relief (p < .05). Higher expected pain relief predicted greater pain reduction after 3 weeks and 3 months (both p < .001). Functional capacity improved over time (p < .001) without consistent group differences. Conclusion Open-label placebos combined with social observational learning produced clinically meaningful analgesia that did not significantly differ from active medication. Treatment expectation represents a key mechanism underlying pain relief in CLBP and calls for further investigation.
开放标签安慰剂和药理学背景下的治疗期望:慢性腰痛的随机临床试验
慢性腰痛(CLBP)显著降低生活质量,仍然难以治疗。阿片类药物处方的增加突出表明需要有效的创新方法。本随机对照试验旨在探讨社会观察学习是否通过治疗预期调节增强CLBP患者的镇痛或开放标签安慰剂治疗。方法130例CLBP患者随机分为2 × 2完全平衡安慰剂设计和自然病史(NH)对照组。患者接受为期3周的诺胺砜(镇痛药)或开放标签安慰剂(OLP)治疗,随访3个月。在治疗前,使用积极的社会观察学习视频(SoL)或中性对照视频(neutral)来操纵期望。疼痛强度(数值评定量表,NRS 0-10)是主要观察指标。次要结局包括治疗预期和功能能力。结果各治疗组疼痛强度随时间均显著降低(p < .001), NH降低幅度最小。OLP + SoL组和镇痛+中性组疼痛减轻程度显著大于NH组(p < 0.05)。期望操作在预期疼痛缓解方面产生显著组间差异(p < 0.05)。较高的预期疼痛缓解预示着3周和3个月后更大的疼痛减轻(p < 0.001)。功能能力随时间的推移而改善(p < .001),但组间差异不一致。结论开放标签安慰剂联合社会观察学习产生的临床意义镇痛与主动用药无显著差异。治疗预期是CLBP疼痛缓解的关键机制,需要进一步研究。
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