Interaction between expectancies and drug effects: an experimental investigation of placebo analgesia with caffeine as an active placebo

In a randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial it is assumed that psychosocial effects of the treatment, regression to the mean and spontaneous remission are identical in the drug and placebo group. Consequently, any difference between the groups can be ascribed to the pharmacological effects. Previous studies suggest that side effects of drugs can enhance expectancies of treatment effects in the drug group compared to the placebo group, and thereby increase placebo responses in the drug group compared to the placebo group. The hypothesis that side effects of drugs can enhance expectancies and placebo responses was tested. Painful laser stimuli were delivered to 20 healthy subjects before and after administration of a drink with 0 or 4 mg/kg caffeine. The drink was administered either with information that it contained a painkiller or that it was a placebo. Laser-evoked potentials and reports of pain, expectancy, arousal and stress were measured. Results Four milligrammes per kilogramme of caffeine reduced pain. Information that a painkiller was administered increased the analgesic effect of caffeine compared to caffeine administered with no drug information. This effect was mediated by expectancies. Information and expectancies had no effect on pain intensity when 0 mg/kg was administered. The analgesic effect of caffeine was increased by information that a painkiller was administered. This was due to an interaction of the pharmacological action of the drug and expectancies. Hence, psychosocial effects accompanying a treatment can differ when an active drug is administered compared to a placebo

The Nature Index: A General Framework for Synthesizing Knowledge on the State of Biodiversity

The magnitude and urgency of the biodiversity crisis is widely recognized within scientific and political organizations. However, a lack of integrated measures for biodiversity has greatly constrained the national and international response to the biodiversity crisis. Thus, integrated biodiversity indexes will greatly facilitate information transfer from science toward other areas of human society. The Nature Index framework samples scientific information on biodiversity from a variety of sources, synthesizes this information, and then transmits it in a simplified form to environmental managers, policymakers, and the public. The Nature Index optimizes information use by incorporating expert judgment, monitoring-based estimates, and model-based estimates. The index relies on a network of scientific experts, each of whom is responsible for one or more biodiversity indicators. The resulting set of indicators is supposed to represent the best available knowledge on the state of biodiversity and ecosystems in any given area. The value of each indicator is scaled relative to a reference state, i.e., a predicted value assessed by each expert for a hypothetical undisturbed or sustainably managed ecosystem. Scaled indicator values can be aggregated or disaggregated over different axes representing spatiotemporal dimensions or thematic groups. A range of scaling models can be applied to allow for different ways of interpreting the reference states, e.g., optimal situations or minimum sustainable levels. Statistical testing for differences in space or time can be implemented using Monte-Carlo simulations. This study presents the Nature Index framework and details its implementation in Norway. The results suggest that the framework is a functional, efficient, and pragmatic approach for gathering and synthesizing scientific knowledge on the state of biodiversity in any marine or terrestrial ecosystem and has general applicability worldwide

The Fear of Pain Questionnaire-III and the Fear of Pain Questionnaire-Short Form: a confirmatory factor analysis

Sara M Vambheim,1 Peter Solvoll Lyby,1,2 Per M Aslaksen,1 Magne Arve Flaten,3 Ole Åsli,1 Laila M Martinussen4 1Department of Psychology, UiT, The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø; 2CatoSenteret Rehabilitation Center, Son; 3Department of Psychology, NTNU, The Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway; 4Management Engineering, DTU, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark Background: The Fear of Pain Questionnaire-III (FPQ-III) is a widely used instrument to assess the fear of pain (FOP) in clinical and nonclinical samples. The FPQ-III has 30 items and is divided into three subscales: Severe Pain, Minor Pain and Medical Pain. Due to findings of poor fit of the original three-factor FPQ-III model, the Fear of Pain Questionnaire-Short Form (FPQ-SF) four-factor model has been suggested as an alternative. The FPQ-SF is a revised version of the FPQ-III, reduced to 20 items and subdivided into four subscales: Severe Pain, Minor Pain, Injection Pain and Dental Pain. Aims and methods: The purpose of the study was to investigate the model fit, reliability and validity of the FPQ-III and the FPQ-SF in a Norwegian nonclinical sample, using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The second aim was to explore the model fit of the two scales in male and female subgroups separately, since previous studies have uncovered differences in how well the questionnaires measure FOP across sex; thus, the questionnaires might not be sex neutral. It has been argued that the FPQ-SF model is better because of the higher fit to the data across sex. To explore model fit across sex within the questionnaires, the model fit, validity and reliability were compared across sex using CFA. Results: The results revealed that both models’ original factor structures had poor fit. However, the FPQ-SF had a better fit overall, compared to the FPQ-III. The model fit of the two models differed across sex, with better fit for males on the FPQ-III and for females on the FPQ-SF. Conclusion: The FPQ-SF is a better questionnaire than the FPQ-III for measurement of FOP in Norwegian samples and across sex subgroups. However, the FPQ-III is a better questionnaire for males than for females, whereas the FPQ-SF is a better questionnaire for females than for males. The findings are discussed and directions for future investigations outlined. Keywords: fear of pain, FPQ-III, FPQ-SF, confirmatory factor analysis, pain, se

Driving after stroke

Driving a motor vehicle is an important instrumental activity of daily living recognized across countries and cultures. Driving provides convenience, independence, and mobility. However, after a stroke, patients may exhibit visual, cognitive, behavioral, and motor symptoms that may negatively affect driving ability. Patients often ask healthcare providers when they can resume driving. It can be difficult to identify those who are fit to drive, those who are not, and those who would benefit from driving rehabilitation. The aim of this chapter is to present evidence to guide clinical decision-making in returning to drive after stroke. The authors are from three different continents and represent important disciplines involved in driving after stroke: medicine, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, and psychology. We first explain the importance of return to driving as a key rehabilitation goal in post-stroke care. We then present an evidence-based overview of key issues related to driving after stroke. Afterwards, we provide a framework for driving screening, assessment, and intervention based on best evidence and practice. An illustrative case study is presented to demonstrate the multiple factors involved in a driving assessment and rehabilitation after stroke. Each chapter starts with a description of the clinical problem encountered. This is followed by a systematic, but concise review of the evidence (RCTs, systematic reviews and meta-analyses) that is relevant for clinical decision-making, and comments on assessment, therapy (training, technology, medication), and the use of technical aids as appropriate. Based on these summaries, clinical algorithms / pathways are provided and the main clinical-decision situations are portrayed. The book is invaluable for all neurorehabilitation team members, clinicians, nurses, and therapists in neurology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and related fields. It is a World Federation for NeuroRehabilitation (WFNR) educational initiative, bridging the gap between the rapidly expanding clinical research in stroke rehabilitation and clinical practice across societies and continents. It can be used for both clinical decision-making for individuals and as well as clinical background knowledge for stroke rehabilitation service development initiatives