Nocebo Hyperalgesia in Patients With Fibromyalgia and Healthy Controls:An Experimental Investigation of Conditioning and Extinction Processes at Baseline and 1-Month Follow-up

Nocebo effects are adverse treatment outcomes that are not ascribed to active treatment components. Potentially, their magnitude might be higher in patients with chronic pain compared to healthy controls since patients likely experience treatment failure more frequently. The current study investigated group differences in the induction and extinction of nocebo effects on pressure pain at baseline (N = 69) and 1-month follow-up (N = 56) in female patients with fibromyalgia and matched healthy controls. Nocebo effects were first experimentally induced via classical conditioning combined with instructions on the pain-increasing function of a sham transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation device, then decreased via extinction. One month later, the same procedures were repeated to explore their stability. Results suggest that nocebo effects were induced in the healthy control group during baseline and follow-up. In the patient group, nocebo effects were only induced during follow-up, without clear group differences. Extinction was only observed during baseline in the healthy control group. Further comparisons of nocebo effects and extinction indicated no significant changes across sessions, possibly suggesting their overall magnitudes were stable over time and across groups. In conclusion, contrary to our expectations, patients with fibromyalgia did not have stronger nocebo hyperalgesia; instead, they might be less responsive to nocebo manipulations than healthy controls. Perspective: The current study is the first to investigate group differences in experimentally manipulated nocebo hyperalgesia between chronic pain and healthy populations at baseline and 1-month follow-up. Since nocebo effects are common in clinical settings, their investigation in different populations is essential to explain and minimize their adverse effects during treatment.</p

Implications of Placebo and Nocebo Effects for Clinical Practice: Expert Consensus

Background: Placebo and nocebo effects occur in clinical or laboratory medical contexts after administration of an inert treatment or as part of active treatments and are due to psychobiological mechanisms such as expectancies of the patient. Placebo and nocebo studies have evolved from predominantly methodological research into a far-reaching interdisciplinary field that is unravelling the neurobiological, behavioural and clinical underpinnings of these phenomena in a broad variety of medical conditions. As a consequence, there is an increasing demand from health professionals to develop expert recommendations about evidence-based and ethical use of placebo and nocebo effects for clinical practice. Methods: A survey and interdisciplinary expert meeting by invitation was organized as part of the 1st Society for Interdisciplinary Placebo Studies (SIPS) conference in 2017. Twenty-nine internationally recognized placebo researchers participated. Results: There was consensus that maximizing placebo effects and minimizing nocebo effects should lead to better treatment outcomes with fewer side effects. Experts particularly agreed on the importance of informing patients about placebo and nocebo effects and training health professionals in patient-clinician communication to maximize placebo and minimize nocebo effects. Conclusions: The current paper forms a first step towards developing evidence-based and ethical recommendations about the implications of placebo and nocebo research for medical practice, based on the current state of evidence and the consensus of experts. Future research might focus on how to implement these recommendations, including how to optimize conditions for educating patients about placebo and nocebo effects and providing training for the implementation in clinical practice. (C) 2018 S. Karger AG, Base

An integrative review of the influence of expectancies on pain

Expectancies can shape pain experiences. Attention for the influence of expectancies on pain has increased particularly due to research on placebo effects, of which expectancy is believed to be the core mechanism. In the current review, we provide a brief overview of the literature on the influence of expectancies on pain. We first discuss the central role of expectancy in the major psychological learning theories. Based on these theories, different kinds of expectancies can be distinguished. Pain experiences are influenced particularly by response expectancies directly pertaining to the pain experience itself, but can also be affected by self-efficacy expectancies regarding one’s ability to cope with pain, and possibly by stimulus expectancies regarding external events. These different kinds of expectancies might interact with each other, and related emotions and cognitions, as reflected by various multifaceted constructs in which expectancies are incorporated. Optimism and pain catastrophizing, in particular, but also hope, trust, worry, and neuroticism have been found to be associated with pain outcomes. We conclude with recommendations for further advancing research on the influence of expectancies on pain and for harnessing expectancy effects in clinical practice

Can placebo and nocebo effects generalize within pain modalities and across somatosensory sensations?

Pain and other somatosensory sensations, such as itch, can be effectively decreased by placebo effects and increased by nocebo effects. There are indications that placebo effects on pain generalize to other sensations and that nocebo effects generalize within itch modalities. However, it has not yet been investigated whether learned effects can generalize within pain stimulus modalities or from pain to itch. Our aims were to test whether placebo and nocebo effects can generalize within pain modalities, ie, from heat pain to pressure pain, and across somatosensory sensations with psychophysiological similarities, ie, from heat pain to cowhage-evoked itch. For this purpose, 65 healthy participants were randomized to either a placebo or nocebo group. All participants first underwent a conditioning and verbal suggestion procedure with heat pain stimuli. Subsequently, responses to heat pain, pressure pain, and cowhage-evoked itch stimuli were tested. Results showed altered levels of heat and pressure pain with the conditioned cue in both placebo and nocebo groups in the expected directions, but no significant difference in itch in both groups. In conclusion, placebo and nocebo effects on pain may generalize within but not across stimulus modalities. This study provides a novel perspective on the role that response generalization plays in physical symptoms.</p

Induction and generalization of nocebo effects on itch

Nocebo effects, that is, negative treatment outcomes due to negative expectancies, can increase itch. Moreover, indirect evidence has shown that nocebo hyperknesis can generalize to another itch modality. Knowledge on response generalization can help to prevent and decrease negative effects. The aims of this study were to investigate (1) the efficacy of inducing nocebo effects on cowhage-evoked itch via verbal suggestions and (2) whether these effects can generalize to (2a) mechanically evoked touch and (2b) mechanically evoked itch. Forty-four healthy participants watched a video suggesting that a nocebo solution increases cowhage-evoked itch and that a control solution does not affect itch. Subsequently, cowhage, mechanical itch, and mechanical touch stimuli were applied. Nocebo effects were measured as the difference in both mean and peak of the outcomes itch and urge to scratch between nocebo and control trials. Main analyses revealed significant nocebo effects on mean and peak itch for all stimuli. For urge to scratch, a significant nocebo effect was only observed for mechanical touch (peak). As mechanical stimuli did not induce pure sensations as planned, posthoc sensitivity analyses were run for mechanical stimuli that individually induced either touch or itch at baseline. These analyses showed similar results for generalization to mechanical itch, but generalization to mechanical touch was non-significant. This study showed that merely verbal suggestion can induce nocebo effects on cowhage-evoked itch and that these effects can generalize to another itch modality. Future studies may examine how to prevent negative experiences from generalizing to subsequent encounters.Applied Ergonomics and Desig

Counterconditioning as Treatment to Reduce Nocebo Effects in Persistent Physical Symptoms: Treatment Protocol and Study Design

Persistent physical symptoms have a high prevalence and a large impact for patients and society. To date, treatment effects for these symptoms are often limited. Nocebo effects (i.e., negative outcomes that are not attributable to active treatment components) have a substantial influence on treatment success and can be established via learning through classical conditioning. Therefore, interventions aimed at reducing nocebo effects by means of counterconditioning, in which an alternative association (inhibiting the previous association) is learned, could be a promising method for improving physical symptoms. In experimental studies, counterconditioning has been shown promising in reducing experimentally-induced nocebo effects on pain and itch. Application of counterconditioning procedures to reduce nocebo effects on clinical symptoms has yet to be researched. This paper provides a protocol of a 6-week counterconditioning intervention aimed at reducing nocebo effects and clinical pain in patients with fibromyalgia. A study in patients with fibromyalgia is proposed to examine the feasibility and potential effectiveness of this counterconditioning intervention as a novel treatment method for reducing nocebo effects and generalization to clinical pain symptoms. Results can help design an optimized treatment protocol for reducing nocebo effects, based on the experiences of participants and the first indications of treatment efficacy.Applied Ergonomics and Desig

Do individual psychological characteristics predict induction and generalization of nocebo and placebo effects on pain and itch?

Background: Nocebo and placebo effects, i.e., adverse or beneficial treatment effects, respectively, putatively due to expectancies can modulate pain and itch. These effects can generalize within the pain or itch modality. Predicting the induction and generalization of these effects can be helpful in clinical practice. This study aims to investigate whether psychological characteristics related to the fear-avoidance model predict the induction and generalization of nocebo and placebo effects on pain and itch in young healthy participants. Methods: Data from two previous experiments were analyzed. In Experiment 1, we induced nocebo and placebo effects on heat pain and tested generalization to pressure pain and to cowhage-evoked itch (n = 33 in a nocebo group, n = 32 in a placebo group). In Experiment 2, we induced nocebo effects on cowhage-evoked itch and tested generalization to mechanical itch and to mechanical touch (n = 44). Potential predictors were anxiety- and stress symptoms, attention to pain/itch, and pain/itch catastrophizing. Multiple regression analyses were performed. Results: For nocebo effects, none of the individual psychological characteristics significantly predicted induction of nocebo effects nor their generalization. For placebo effects, only less stress symptoms, lower attention to pain, and higher pain catastrophizing weakly predicted a stronger generalization of placebo effects from heat pain to pressure pain. Conclusion: The tested psychological characteristics may not play an important role in the induction and generalization of nocebo and placebo effects in healthy individuals. However, firm conclusions cannot be drawn with the current sample. Future studies should validate findings in larger and more diverse samples.HR HealthApplied Ergonomics and Desig

An Integrative Review of the Influence of Expectancies on Pain

Expectancies can shape pain experiences. Attention for the influence of expectancies on pain has increased particularly due to research on placebo effects, of which expectancy is believed to be the core mechanism. In the current review, we provide a brief overview of the literature on the influence of expectancies on pain. We first discuss the central role of expectancy in the major psychological learning theories. Based on these theories, different kinds of expectancies can be distinguished. Pain experiences are influenced particularly by response expectancies directly pertaining to the pain experience itself, but can also be affected by self-efficacy expectancies regarding one’s ability to cope with pain, and possibly by stimulus expectancies regarding external events. These different kinds of expectancies might interact with each other, and related emotions and cognitions, as reflected by various multifaceted constructs in which expectancies are incorporated. Optimism and pain catastrophizing, in particular, but also hope, trust, worry, and neuroticism have been found to be associated with pain outcomes. We conclude with recommendations for further advancing research on the influence of expectancies on pain and for harnessing expectancy effects in clinical practice

Can placebo and nocebo effects generalize within pain modalities and across somatosensory sensations?

Pain and other somatosensory sensations, such as itch, can be effectively decreased by placebo effects and increased by nocebo effects. There are indications that placebo effects on pain generalize to other sensations and that nocebo effects generalize within itch modalities. However, it has not yet been investigated whether learned effects can generalize within pain stimulus modalities or from pain to itch. Our aims were to test whether placebo and nocebo effects can generalize within pain modalities, ie, from heat pain to pressure pain, and across somatosensory sensations with psychophysiological similarities, ie, from heat pain to cowhage-evoked itch. For this purpose, 65 healthy participants were randomized to either a placebo or nocebo group. All participants first underwent a conditioning and verbal suggestion procedure with heat pain stimuli. Subsequently, responses to heat pain, pressure pain, and cowhage-evoked itch stimuli were tested. Results showed altered levels of heat and pressure pain with the conditioned cue in both placebo and nocebo groups in the expected directions, but no significant difference in itch in both groups. In conclusion, placebo and nocebo effects on pain may generalize within but not across stimulus modalities. This study provides a novel perspective on the role that response generalization plays in physical symptoms.Green Open Access added to TU Delft Institutional Repository ‘You share, we take care!’ – Taverne project https://www.openaccess.nl/en/you-share-we-take-care Otherwise as indicated in the copyright section: the publisher is the copyright holder of this work and the author uses the Dutch legislation to make this work public.Applied Ergonomics and Desig

Efficacy of open-label counterconditioning for reducing nocebo effects on pressure pain

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.</p