Dataset Information

Why do open-label placebos work? A randomized controlled trial of an open-label placebo induction with and without extended information about the placebo effect in allergic rhinitis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Several studies demonstrated that placebo treatment may have a significant impact on many different symptoms. While in the traditional view concealment of the placebo is essential, recent studies report intriguing evidence that placebos may work even without deception. For example, it has been demonstrated that open-label placebos can improve symptoms in allergic rhinitis. However, the mechanisms of how placebos without concealment work remain unknown.

Trial design

In order to examine expectancy effects we conducted a randomized controlled trial (N = 46), in which patients with allergic symptoms received either placebos without deception or no pills at all. In half of those patients we induced positive expectations about the placebo effect. After two weeks we tested whether symptoms and quality of life had changed.

Results

Results revealed that open-label placebos improved allergic symptoms more than the control group. Inducing positive expectations had no effects on the improvement of allergic symptoms (the primary and more objective outcome), but on mental sum scores of the quality of life questionnaire.

Conclusions

Placebos without deception can improve symptoms in allergic rhinitis. Positive expectations do not contribute to the efficacy of open-label placebos, but seem to have an effect on more global and subjective well-being (mental or emotional quality of life).

Clinical trial registration number

German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00012303.

SUBMITTER: Schaefer M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5841659 | biostudies-literature | 2018

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Why do open-label placebos work? A randomized controlled trial of an open-label placebo induction with and without extended information about the placebo effect in allergic rhinitis.

Schaefer Michael M Sahin Tamay T Berstecher Benjamin B

PloS one 20180307 3

<h4>Background</h4>Several studies demonstrated that placebo treatment may have a significant impact on many different symptoms. While in the traditional view concealment of the placebo is essential, recent studies report intriguing evidence that placebos may work even without deception. For example, it has been demonstrated that open-label placebos can improve symptoms in allergic rhinitis. However, the mechanisms of how placebos without concealment work remain unknown.<h4>Trial design</h4>In o ...[more]

PMID: 29513699

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPlacebos can reduce physical symptoms even when provided with full honesty and disclosure. Yet, the precise mechanisms underlying the effects of "open-label placebos" (OLPs) have remained subject of debate. Furthermore, it is unclear whether OLPs are similarly effective when provided remotely, as is sometimes required e.g. in the current COVID-19 pandemic.MethodsIn a randomized-controlled trial, we examined the effects of OLP plus treatment as usual (TAU) compared to TAU alone on symptom reduction in people with allergic rhinitis (N = 54) over the course of two weeks. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, OLP was provided remotely (i.e. sent via postal service). To investigate the potential influence of the clinical encounter on the effects of OLP, we manipulated the perception of the virtual clinical encounter, both with respect to verbal and nonverbal factors (augmented vs. limited encounter).ResultsThe results of the manipulation check confirmed that the augmented clinical encounter was evaluated more positively than the limited encounter, in terms of perceived warmth of the provider. Participants from all treatment groups showed significant symptom reduction from baseline to two weeks later, but OLP had no incremental effect over TAU. Participants benefitted more from OLP when they did not take any other medication against allergic symptoms than when taking medication on demand. When controlling for baseline symptoms, a significant treatment by encounter interaction was found, pointing to greater symptom improvement in the OLP group when the encounter was augmented, whereas the control group improved more when the encounter was limited.DiscussionThe study demonstrates that providing OLP and enhancing the encounter remotely is possible, but their effectiveness might be lower in comparison to previous studies relying on physical patient-provider interaction. The study raises questions for future research about the potential and challenges of remote placebo studies and virtual clinical encounters. The study has been registered as a clinical trial at ISRCTN (record number: 39018).

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Several studies suggest that gut microbiota may play an important role in allergic diseases. The present trial aims to examine effects of the probiotic Enterococcus faecalis on symptoms of allergic rhinitis in patients. Effects of this probiotic on the immune system have been reported by several studies, but the majority of the previous trials were animal studies. In addition, it is well known that symptoms in allergic rhinitis are prone to exhibit high placebo responses. Moreover, recent studies report that even placebos without deception (open-label placebos) are highly effective in reducing symptoms of allergic rhinitis. Our study design combines both new approaches to assess effects on allergic symptoms in patients. The objective of this study is to compare the effects of a probiotic treatment (E. faecalis) with effects seen by open-label placebo, concealed placebo treatment and no treatment control. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:A total of 120 patients with allergic rhinitis will be randomly assigned to one of four different groups: a double-blind probiotic/placebo group (groups 1 and 2), an open-label placebo group (group 3) and a no-treatment group (group 4) to control for spontaneous variation of symptoms. The primary outcome is the evaluation of allergic symptoms using the Combined Symptoms Medication Score. Furthermore, health-related quality of life is examined (Rhinitis Quality of Life Questionnaire). Secondary outcomes include a visual analogue scale on allergic burden and a second quality of life questionnaire. This report describes the study design of the randomised controlled trial. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The study design was approved by the ethical committee of the UKT Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, Tübingen, Germany. The trial is registered at the German Clinical Trials Register (www.drks.de, DRKS00015804). The trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:German Clinical Trials Register (www.drks.de, DRKS00015804); Pre-results.

Project description:Background: This study was conducted to evaluate the safety and tolerability, and population pharmacokinetics (PPK) of montelukast as well as efficacy in the treatment of perennial allergic rhinitis (PAR) in paediatric Japanese patients aged between 1 and 15 years. Methods: In this multi-centre, open-label trial, 87 paediatric Japanese patients with PAR received montelukast 4?mg oral granules (OG) for 4 weeks (1-5-year-olds, N?=?15), 4?mg OG for 12 weeks (1-5-year-olds, N?=?36), 5?mg chewable tablets (CT) for 12 weeks (6-9-year-olds, N?=?18), or 5?mg CT for12 weeks (10-15-year-olds, N?=?18). Clinical exams and laboratory assessments were conducted at study visits, and adverse events (AE) were monitored throughout the study up to 14 days after the last visit. Population pharmacokinetic approach was used to estimate AUC0-?, Cmax, Tmax and apparent elimination half-life in each age group. Efficacy was assessed based on global evaluations by the subject's caregiver. Results: There were no serious AEs and one discontinuation due to an AE. The most common AEs in any of the treatment groups were nasopharyngitis, pharyngitis, and acute sinusitis. Montelukast exposure (AUC0-?) was similar in the 1-5-year-old group and the 6-9-year-old group, but 19% lower in the 10-15-year-old group. Among all patients, the total proportion of patients whose global evaluation was "very much better" was 5.7% (week 2), 11.5% (week 4), and 16.9% (week 12) reflecting improvement in symptoms over time. Conclusion: Montelukast was generally well tolerated in Japanese children with PAR. AUC0-?was similar in 1-5 and 6-9-year-olds, while a lower exposure was observed in the 10-15-year-old group likely due to differences in bodyweight. The exposure in Japanese paediatric patients was generally consistent with that in non-Japanese paediatric and adult patients. As assessed by the patients' caregivers, montelukast also demonstrated symptomatic improvement based on global evaluations of PAR.

Project description:BackgroundThe efficacy of open-label placebos (OLPs) has been increasingly demonstrated and their use holds promise for applications compatible with basic ethical principles. Taking this concept one step further an imaginary pill (IP) intervention without the use of a physical pill was developed and tested in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). To explore participants' experiences and views, we conducted the first qualitative study in the field of IPs.MethodsA reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) of semi-structured interviews with test anxious students (N = 20) was nested in an RCT investigating an IP and OLP intervention. In addition, open-ended questions from the RCT were evaluated (N = 114) to corroborate the RTA and pill characteristics were included to more accurately capture the IP experience.ResultsFour key themes were identified: (1) attitude towards the intervention, (2) applicability of the intervention, (3) experience of effects, and (4) characteristics of the imagination. The IP intervention was well-accepted, easily applicable, and various effects, pill characteristics and appearances were described. While many participants did not desire a physical pill, either due to the absence of the imagination component or aversion to pills, the approach was considered to be cognitively and time demanding, which in turn, however, encouraged the establishment of a therapeutic ritual that protected against the increase in test anxiety during the preparation phase. OLP findings were comparable, and especially the importance of a treatment rationale was stressed in both groups, counteracting an initial ambivalent attitude. The RTA findings were supported by the open-ended questions of the RCT.ConclusionIPs appear to be a well-accepted and easily applicable intervention producing a variety of beneficial effects. Thus, the IP approach might serve as an imaginary based alternative to OLPs warranting further investigations on its application to harness placebo effects without a physical pill.

Project description:BackgroundAllergic rhinitis (AR) is an immune response of the nasal mucosa to airborne allergens and involves nasal congestion, watery nasal discharge, itching of the nose, and sneezing. The symptoms of allergic rhinitis may significantly affect a patient's quality of life and can be associated with conditions such as fatigue, headache, cognitive impairment, and sleep disturbances. Various complementary and alternative medicine treatments have been used for this condition in clinical practice. The Ayurveda system of medicine is the most common complementary medicine system practiced in Sri Lanka. The aim of this study is to examine the efficacy and safety of a decoction used in traditional Ayurveda for allergic rhinitis and its ready- to-use freeze dried formulation in comparison to an antihistamine over a period of 4 weeks on relief of symptoms in allergic rhinitis.Study designThis is a three-arm, open-label, non-inferiority, randomized controlled clinical trial enrolling patients with AR. Tamalakyadi decoction containing 12 ingredients (TMD12), used in traditional Ayurveda and its freeze-dried formulation are the test products. The efficacy and safety of the two Ayurvedic dosage forms will be tested against the antihistamine loratadine. Patients with symptoms of AR will be allocated randomly into the three arms after a 1-week run-in period and the medications will be given orally for 28 days. Total Nasal symptom Score (TNSS) of the patients will be used as the primary efficacy endpoint. TNSS will be recorded and compared between the three arms prior to visit 1, at the end of 28 days, and end of the first and second months of follow-up. Symptom scores of daytime nasal symptoms, night time nasal symptoms, non-nasal symptoms and health-related quality of life questionnaire are used as secondary end points.DiscussionThis clinical trial will be able to provide evidence-based scientific data on Ayurvedic dosage form, TMD12, and the freeze-dried formulation in the treatment of allergic rhinitis. This trial is expected to develop capacity to scientifically evaluate various Ayurvedic treatments that are claimed to have efficacy in treatment of various disease conditions.Trial registrationISRCTN18149439 (6 May 2019).

Project description:Background:Allergic respiratory diseases such as allergic rhinitis (AR) and allergic asthma (AA) are common conditions that can influence sleep and daytime functioning. However, the significance of this impact is unclear-particularly in perennial allergy sufferers. This study investigates the impact of perennial allergy on sleep, daily activities and productivity. Methods:Adults with self-reported or physician-diagnosed perennial AR aged ??18 years were recruited in Denmark, France, Germany and Sweden. Allergy sufferers were identified using online panels closely matching national population characteristics for each country. Impact on sleep, work, productivity and activity (by the Work, Productivity and Activity Index) were analysed. Descriptive analyses were conducted. Results:In total, 511 subjects with perennial AR (47.4% also with seasonal allergy) completed the survey. Most subjects (77.5%) had a physician-diagnosis of AR; 46.4% were diagnosed with both AA and AR. Most subjects (65.2%) reported sensitisation to house dust mites. Of all subjects, 66.0% reported sleep problems. Subjects with sleep problems woke, on average, 3.8 times per night, with 92.0% taking 15+ min to fall asleep (22.2% took 60+ min). Upon waking at night, 40.8% struggled to get back to sleep, and 69.2% had difficulties waking in the morning due to tiredness. Disturbances in daily functioning due to sleep issues were reported in 85.5-95.0% of subjects with sleep problems across all aspects investigated. Overall work and activity impairment were 53.3% and 47.1%, respectively. Sleep issues were more frequent (78.1% vs 54.7%) in those diagnosed with both AR and AA compared to AR alone, and more burdensome, with a greater impact on daily functioning (47.0% vs 33.3%) and impairment in work and activity (62.0% and 54.9% vs 39.3% and 35.2%, respectively). Of all subjects, 20.5% were receiving AIT at the time of the survey; of these, 36.4% reported moderate or great improvement in sleep due to allergy treatment. Conclusions:In perennial AR sufferers, sleep problems are common and impact on daily functioning, with results indicating a greater burden in those with both AR and AA compared to AR alone.

Dataset Information

Why do open-label placebos work? A randomized controlled trial of an open-label placebo induction with and without extended information about the placebo effect in allergic rhinitis.

Background

Trial design

Results

Conclusions

Clinical trial registration number

Publications

Why do open-label placebos work? A randomized controlled trial of an open-label placebo induction with and without extended information about the placebo effect in allergic rhinitis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets