Efficacy of open-label counterconditioning for reducing nocebo effects on pressure pain.
Journal
European journal of pain (London, England)
ISSN: 1532-2149
Titre abrégé: Eur J Pain
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9801774
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
08 2023
08 2023
Historique:
revised:
12
03
2023
received:
12
06
2022
accepted:
14
03
2023
medline:
18
7
2023
pubmed:
19
3
2023
entrez:
18
3
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Nocebo effects can adversely affect the experience of physical symptoms, such as pain and itch. Nocebo effects on itch and pain have shown to be induced by conditioning with thermal heat stimuli and reduced by counterconditioning. However, open-label counterconditioning, in which participants are informed about the placebo content of the treatment, has not been investigated, while this can be highly relevant for clinical practice. Furthermore, (open-label) conditioning and counterconditioning has not been investigated for pain modalities relevant to musculoskeletal disorders, such as pressure pain. In a randomized controlled trial, we investigated in 110 healthy female participants whether nocebo effects on pressure pain combined with open-label verbal suggestions can be (1) induced via conditioning and (2) reduced via counterconditioning. Participants were allocated to either a nocebo- or sham-conditioning group. Next, the nocebo group was allocated to either counterconditioning, extinction or continued nocebo conditioning; sham conditioning was followed by placebo conditioning. Nocebo effects were significantly larger after nocebo conditioning than sham conditioning (d = 1.27). Subsequently, a larger reduction of the nocebo effect was found after counterconditioning than after extinction (d = 1.02) and continued nocebo conditioning (d = 1.66), with effects similar to placebo conditioning (following sham conditioning). These results show that (counter)conditioning combined with open-label suggestions can modulate nocebo effects on pressure pain, which provides promise in designing learning-based treatments to reduce nocebo effects in patients with chronic pain disorders, particularly for musculoskeletal disorders. Few studies have investigated the efficacy counterconditioning to reduce nocebo effects. Whereas typically deceptive procedures are used, these are not ethically appropriate for use in clinical practice. The current study demonstrates that open-label counterconditioning in a pain modality relevant for many chronic pain conditions may be a promising new strategy for reducing nocebo effects in a non-deceptive and ethical manner, which provides promise in designing learning-based treatments to reduce nocebo effects in patients with chronic pain disorders.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Nocebo effects can adversely affect the experience of physical symptoms, such as pain and itch. Nocebo effects on itch and pain have shown to be induced by conditioning with thermal heat stimuli and reduced by counterconditioning. However, open-label counterconditioning, in which participants are informed about the placebo content of the treatment, has not been investigated, while this can be highly relevant for clinical practice. Furthermore, (open-label) conditioning and counterconditioning has not been investigated for pain modalities relevant to musculoskeletal disorders, such as pressure pain.
METHODS
In a randomized controlled trial, we investigated in 110 healthy female participants whether nocebo effects on pressure pain combined with open-label verbal suggestions can be (1) induced via conditioning and (2) reduced via counterconditioning. Participants were allocated to either a nocebo- or sham-conditioning group. Next, the nocebo group was allocated to either counterconditioning, extinction or continued nocebo conditioning; sham conditioning was followed by placebo conditioning.
RESULTS
Nocebo effects were significantly larger after nocebo conditioning than sham conditioning (d = 1.27). Subsequently, a larger reduction of the nocebo effect was found after counterconditioning than after extinction (d = 1.02) and continued nocebo conditioning (d = 1.66), with effects similar to placebo conditioning (following sham conditioning).
CONCLUSIONS
These results show that (counter)conditioning combined with open-label suggestions can modulate nocebo effects on pressure pain, which provides promise in designing learning-based treatments to reduce nocebo effects in patients with chronic pain disorders, particularly for musculoskeletal disorders.
SIGNIFICANCE
Few studies have investigated the efficacy counterconditioning to reduce nocebo effects. Whereas typically deceptive procedures are used, these are not ethically appropriate for use in clinical practice. The current study demonstrates that open-label counterconditioning in a pain modality relevant for many chronic pain conditions may be a promising new strategy for reducing nocebo effects in a non-deceptive and ethical manner, which provides promise in designing learning-based treatments to reduce nocebo effects in patients with chronic pain disorders.
Types de publication
Randomized Controlled Trial
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
831-847Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Pain published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Pain Federation - EFIC ®.
Références
Bajcar, E. A., Wiercioch-Kuzianik, K., Farley, D., Buglewicz, E., Paulewicz, B., & Bąbel, P. (2021). Order does matter: The combined effects of classical conditioning and verbal suggestions on placebo hypoalgesia and nocebo hyperalgesia. Pain, 162(8), 2237.
Bartels, D. J. P., van Laarhoven, A. I. M., Haverkamp, E. A., Wilder-Smith, O. H., Donders, A. R. T., van Middendorp, H., van de Kerkhof, P. C. M., & Evers, A. W. M. (2014). Role of conditioning and verbal suggestion in placebo and nocebo effects on itch. PLoS One, 9(3), e91727. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0091727
Bartels, D. J. P., van Laarhoven, A. I. M., Stroo, M., Hijne, K., Peerdeman, K. J., Donders, A. R. T., van de Kerkhof, P. C. M., & Evers, A. W. M. (2017). Minimizing nocebo effects by conditioning with verbal suggestion: A randomized clinical trial in healthy humans. PLoS One, 12(9), e0182959. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0182959
Benedetti, F., Lanotte, M., Lopiano, L., & Colloca, L. (2007). When words are painful: Unraveling the mechanisms of the nocebo effect. Neuroscience, 147(2), 260-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.NEUROSCIENCE.2007.02.020
Carvalho, C., Caetano, J. M., Cunha, L., Rebouta, P., Kaptchuk, T. J., & Kirsch, I. (2016). Open-label placebo treatment in chronic low back pain: A randomized controlled trial. Pain, 157(12), 2766-2772. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000700
Colagiuri, B., & Quinn, V. F. (2018). Autonomic arousal as a mechanism of the persistence of nocebo hyperalgesia. The Journal of Pain, 19(5), 476-486.
Colagiuri, B., Quinn, V. F., & Colloca, L. (2015). Nocebo hyperalgesia, partial reinforcement, and extinction. The Journal of Pain, 16(10), 995-1004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2015.06.012
Colloca, L., Petrovic, P., Wager, T. D., Ingvar, M., & Benedetti, F. (2010). How the number of learning trials affects placebo and nocebo responses. Pain, 151(2), 430-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2010.08.007
Colloca, L., Sigaudo, M., & Benedetti, F. (2008). The role of learning in nocebo and placebo effects. Pain, 136(1-2), 211-218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2008.02.006
Engelhard, I. M., Leer, A., Lange, E., & Olatunji, B. O. (2014). Shaking that icky feeling: Effects of extinction and counterconditioning on disgust-related evaluative learning. Behavior Therapy, 45(5), 708-719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2014.04.003
Jensen, K. B., Kosek, E., Petzke, F., Carville, S., Fransson, P., Marcus, H., Williams, S. C. R., Choy, E., Giesecke, T., & Mainguy, Y. (2009). Evidence of dysfunctional pain inhibition in fibromyalgia reflected in rACC during provoked pain. Pain, 144(1-2), 95-100.
Kang, S., Vervliet, B., Engelhard, I. M., van Dis, E. A. M., & Hagenaars, M. A. (2018). Reduced return of threat expectancy after counterconditioning versus extinction. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 108, 78-84.
Kaptchuk, T. J., Friedlander, E., Kelley, J. M., Sanchez, M. N., Kokkotou, E., Singer, J. P., Kowalczykowski, M., Miller, F. G., Kirsch, I., & Lembo, A. J. (2010). Placebos without deception: A randomized controlledtrial in irritable bowel syndrome. PLoS One, 5(12), e15591. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0015591
Kerkhof, I., Vansteenwegen, D., Baeyens, F., & Hermans, D. (2011). Counterconditioning: An effective technique for changing conditioned preferences. Experimental Psychology, 58(1), 31-38. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000063
Kleine-Borgmann, J., Schmidt, K., Hellmann, A., & Bingel, U. (2019). Effects of open-label placebo on pain, functional disability, and spine mobility in patients with chronic back pain: A randomized controlled trial. Pain, 160(12), 2891-2897.
Klinger, R., Blasini, M., Schmitz, J., & Colloca, L. (2017). Nocebo effects in clinical studies: Hints for pain therapy. Pain Reports, 2(2), e586.
Lakens, D., Scheel, A. M., & Isager, P. M. (2018). Equivalence testing for psychological research: A tutorial. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(2), 259-269.
Locher, C., Nascimento, A. F., Kirsch, I., Kossowsky, J., Meyer, A., & Gaab, J. (2017). Is the rationale more important than deception? A randomized controlled trial of open-label placebo analgesia. Pain, 158(12), 2320-2328. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001012
Lorenz, J., Hauck, M., Paur, R. C., Nakamura, Y., Zimmermann, R., Bromm, B., & Engel, A. K. (2005). Cortical correlates of false expectations during pain intensity judgments-A possible manifestation of placebo/nocebo cognitions. Brain, Behavior, and Immunity, 19(4), 283-295.
Marques, A. P., Santo, A. S. D. E., Berssaneti, A. A., Matsutani, L. A., & Yuan, S. L. K. (2017). Prevalence of fibromyalgia: Literature review update. Revista Brasileira de Reumatologia, 57, 356-363.
Meeuwis, S. H., Van Middendorp, H., Pacheco-Lopez, G., Ninaber, M. K., Lavrijsen, A. P. M., Van Der Wee, N., Veldhuijzen, D. S., & Evers, A. W. M. (2019). Antipruritic placebo effects by conditioning H1-antihistamine. Psychosomatic Medicine, 81(9), 841-850. https://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000000743
Meijer, S., Van Middendorp, H., Peerdeman, K. J., & Evers, A. W. (2022). Counterconditioning as treatment to reduce nocebo effects in persistent physical symptoms: Treatment protocol and study design. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 806409.
Meulders, A., Karsdorp, P. A., Claes, N., & Vlaeyen, J. W. S. (2015). Comparing counterconditioning and extinction as methods to reduce fear of movement-related pain. The Journal of Pain, 16(12), 1353-1365.
Meulders, A., Vansteenwegen, D., & Vlaeyen, J. W. (2011). The acquisition of fear of movement-related pain and associative learning: A novel pain-relevant human fear conditioning paradigm. Pain, 152(11), 2460-2469.
Meulders, A., & Vlaeyen, J. W. (2013). Mere intention to perform painful movements elicits fear of movement-related pain: An experimental study on fear acquisition beyond actual movements. The Journal of Pain, 14(4), 412-423.
Miller, F. G., Wendler, D., & Swartzman, L. C. (2005). Deception in research on the placebo effect. PLoS Medicine, 2(9), e262. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0020262
Montgomery, G. H., & Kirsch, I. (1997). Classical conditioning and the placebo effect. Pain, 72(1-2), 107-113.
Peerdeman, K. J., Geers, A. L., Della Porta, D., Veldhuijzen, D. S., & Kirsch, I. (2021). Underpredicting pain: An experimental investigation into the benefits and risks. Pain, 162(7), 2024-2035.
Peerdeman, K. J., van Laarhoven, A. I. M., Keij, S. M., Vase, L., Rovers, M. M., Peters, M. L., & Evers, A. W. M. (2016). Relieving patientsʼ pain with expectation interventions. Pain, 157(6), 1179-1191. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000540
Petzke, F., Clauw, D. J., Ambrose, K., Khine, A., & Gracely, R. H. (2003). Increased pain sensitivity in fibromyalgia: Effects of stimulus type and mode of presentation. Pain, 105(3), 403-413. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3959(03)00204-5
Raes, A. K., & de Raedt, R. (2012). The effect of counterconditioning on evaluative responses and harm expectancy in a fear conditioning paradigm. Behavior Therapy, 43(4), 757-767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2012.03.012
Thomaidou, M. A., Veldhuijzen, D. S., Meulders, A., & Evers, A. W. M. (2021). An experimental investigation into the mediating role of pain-related fear in boosting nocebo hyperalgesia. Pain, 162(1), 287-299. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002017
Thomaidou, M. A., Veldhuijzen, D. S., Peerdeman, K. J., Wiebing, N. Z. S., Blythe, J. S., & Evers, A. W. M. (2020). Learning mechanisms in nocebo hyperalgesia: The role of conditioning and extinction processes. Pain, 161(7), 1597-1608. https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001861
Van Ryckeghem, D. M., Crombez, G., Goubert, L., De Houwer, J., Onraedt, T., & Van Damme, S. (2013). The predictive value of attentional bias towards pain-related information in chronic pain patients: A diary study. Pain, 154(3), 468-475.
Vase, L., Robinson, M. E., Verne, G. N., & Price, D. D. (2003). The contributions of suggestion, desire, and expectation to placebo effects in irritable bowel syndrome patients: An empirical investigation. Pain, 105(1), 17-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3959(03)00073-3
Vase, L., Robinson, M. E., Verne, G. N., & Price, D. D. (2005). Increased placebo analgesia over time in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients is associated with desire and expectation but not endogenous opioid mechanisms. Pain, 115(3), 338-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2005.03.014
Wolfe, F., Smythe, H. A., Yunus, M. B., Bennett, R. M., Bombardier, C., Goldenberg, D. L., Tugwell, P., Campbell, S. M., Abeles, M., Clark, P., Fam, A. G., Farber, S. J., Fiechtner, J. J., Michael Franklin, C., Gatter, R. A., Hamaty, D., Lessard, J., Lichtbroun, A. S., Masi, A. T., … Sheon, R. P. (1990). The american college of rheumatology 1990 criteria for the classification of fibromyalgia. Arthritis and Rheumatism, 33(2), 160-172. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.1780330203