Deceptive but not open label placebos attenuate motion-induced nausea

被引:16
作者
Barnes, K. [1 ]
Yu , A. [1 ]
Josupeit, J. [2 ]
Colagiuri, B. [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[2] Heinrich Heine Univ, Dusseldorf, Germany
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
Galvanic vestibular stimulation; Motion sickness; Nausea; Open label placebo effect; Placebo effect; Virtual reality; GALVANIC VESTIBULAR STIMULATION; VIRTUAL-REALITY; DOUBLE-BLIND; SICKNESS; EXPECTANCIES; INSTRUCTION; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1016/j.jpsychores.2019.109808
中图分类号
R749 [精神病学];
学科分类号
100205 ;
摘要
Objective: Nausea is a common complaint, known to respond to the placebo effect. Existing research has employed deception when administering placebos for nausea, limiting therapeutic translation on ethical grounds. We therefore examined the potential of non-deceptive open-label placebos (OLPs) to reduce nausea. Methods: Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation (GVS) and Virtual Reality (VR) were employed to model nausea in healthy volunteers across two experiments. In both experiments nausea was elicited with and without sham treatment (peppermint vapor and brain stimulation, respectively). In Exp. 1, participants (n = 61) were randomized to deceptive placebo, semi-open placebo, fully-open placebo, or control. In Exp. 2, participants (n = 93) were randomized to deceptive placebo, semi-open placebo, or control. Results: Exp. 1 found limited evidence for a placebo effect (F(1, 56) = 1.15, p =.29, eta(2)(p) = 0.02), even following deceptive treatment (F(1, 56) = 1.92, p =.17, eta(2)(p) = 0. 03). In Exp. 2, deceptive placebo reduced nausea relative to control (F(1, 89) = 6.91, p =.010, eta(2)(p) = 0.07) and OLP (F(1, 89) = 5.47, p =.022, eta(2)(p)= 0.06). Pooled Bayesian analysis across experiments provided strong evidence that deceptive placebos reduce nausea relative to control (BF10 = 30.91) and anecdotal evidence for the benefit of deceptive treatment over non-deceptive (BFio = 2.46) and no benefit of OLP over control (BF10 = 0.63). Conclusions: No positive evidence for OLP effects in nausea were observed. However, a deceptive effect in VR was observed. These findings raise questions regarding the efficacy of open-label intervention in nausea.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 47 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2013, ANOVA for the behavioral sciences researcher
  • [2] ELECTROCORTICAL THERAPY FOR MOTION SICKNESS
    Arshad, Qadeer
    Cerchiai, Niccolo
    Goga, Usman
    Nigmatullina, Yuliya
    Roberts, R. Ed
    Casani, Augusto P.
    Golding, John F.
    Gresty, Michael A.
    Bronstein, Adolfo M.
    [J]. NEUROLOGY, 2015, 85 (14) : 1257 - 1259
  • [3] What is nausea? A historical analysis of changing views
    Balaban, Carey D.
    Yates, Bill J.
    [J]. AUTONOMIC NEUROSCIENCE-BASIC & CLINICAL, 2017, 202 : 5 - 17
  • [4] PROVING THE NULL HYPOTHESIS IN CLINICAL-TRIALS
    BLACKWELDER, WC
    [J]. CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS, 1982, 3 (04): : 345 - 353
  • [5] Informed consent and clinical trials: where is the placebo effect?
    Blease, C. R.
    Bishop, F. L.
    Kaptchuk, T. J.
    [J]. BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2017, 356
  • [6] Are open-Label Placebos Ethical? Informed Consent and Ethical Equivocations
    Blease, Charlotte
    Colloca, Luana
    Kaptchuk, Ted J.
    [J]. BIOETHICS, 2016, 30 (06) : 407 - 414
  • [7] Open-label placebo treatment in chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial
    Carvalho, Claudia
    Caetano, Joaquim Machado
    Cunha, Lidia
    Rebouta, Paula
    Kaptchuk, Ted J.
    Kirsch, Irving
    [J]. PAIN, 2016, 157 (12) : 2766 - 2772
  • [8] Charlesworth James E G, 2017, J Evid Based Med, V10, P97, DOI 10.1111/jebm.12251
  • [9] THE PLACEBO EFFECT: FROM CONCEPTS TO GENES
    Colagiuri, B.
    Schenk, L. A.
    Kessler, M. D.
    Dorsey, S. G.
    Colloca, L.
    [J]. NEUROSCIENCE, 2015, 307 : 171 - 190
  • [10] Participant expectancies in double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trials: potential limitations to trial validity
    Colagiuri, Ben
    [J]. CLINICAL TRIALS, 2010, 7 (03) : 246 - 255