For many years, placebos have been conceptualised by their inert content and their use as controls in clinical trials and treatments in clinical practice. Recent research demonstrates that placebo effects are genuine psychobiological phenomenon attributable to the overall therapeutic context, and that placebo effects can be robust in both laboratory and clinical settings. Evidence has also emerged that placebo effects can exist in clinical practice, even if no placebo is given. Further promotion and integration of laboratory and clinical research will allow advances in the ethical harnessing of placebo mechanisms that are inherent in routine clinical care and the potential use of treatments to primarily promote placebo effects.

BackgroundPlacebo treatment can significantly influence subjective symptoms. However, it is widely believed that response to placebo requires concealment or deception. We tested whether open-label placebo (non-deceptive and non-concealed administration) is superior to a no-treatment control with matched patient-provider interactions in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).MethodsTwo-group, randomized, controlled three week trial (August 2009-April 2010) conducted at a single academic center, involving 80 primarily female (70%) patients, mean age 47±18 with IBS diagnosed by Rome III criteria and with a score ≥150 on the IBS Symptom Severity Scale (IBS-SSS). Patients were randomized to either open-label placebo pills presented as “placebo pills made of an inert substance, like sugar pills, that have been shown in clinical studies to produce significant improvement in IBS symptoms through mind-body self-healing processes” or no-treatment controls with the same quality of interaction with providers. The primary outcome was IBS Global Improvement Scale (IBS-GIS). Secondary measures were IBS Symptom Severity Scale (IBS-SSS), IBS Adequate Relief (IBS-AR) and IBS Quality of Life (IBS-QoL).FindingsOpen-label placebo produced significantly higher mean (±SD) global improvement scores (IBS-GIS) at both 11-day midpoint (5.2±1.0 vs. 4.0±1.1, p<.001) and at 21-day endpoint (5.0±1.5 vs. 3.9±1.3, p = .002). Significant results were also observed at both time points for reduced symptom severity (IBS-SSS, p = .008 and p = .03) and adequate relief (IBS-AR, p = .02 and p = .03); and a trend favoring open-label placebo was observed for quality of life (IBS-QoL) at the 21-day endpoint (p = .08).ConclusionPlacebos administered without deception may be an effective treatment for IBS. Further research is warranted in IBS, and perhaps other conditions, to elucidate whether physicians can benefit patients using placebos consistent with informed consent.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01010191

No abstract

Negative expectations deriving from the clinical encounter can produce negative outcomes, known as nocebo effects. Specifically, research on the nocebo effect indicates that information disclosure about potential side effects can itself contribute to producing adverse effects. Neurobiological processes play a role in the nocebo effect and this paper provides a selective review of mechanistic research on the nocebo effect. Comparatively little attention has been directed to clinical studies and their implications for daily clinical practice. The nocebo response is influenced by the content and the way information is presented to patients in clinical trials in both the placebo as well as active treatment conditions. Nocebo effect adversely influences quality of life and therapy adherence, emphasizing the need for minimizing these responses to the extent possible. Evidence further indicates that the informed consent process in clinical trials may induce nocebo effects. This paper concludes with ethical directions for future patient-oriented research and routine practice.

A key component of informed consent to participate in medical research includes understanding that research is not the same as treatment.