Components of placebo effect: randomised controlled trial in patients with irritable bowel syndrome. Issue 7651 (3rd April 2008)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Kaptchuk, Ted J; Kelley, John M; Conboy, Lisa A; Davis, Roger B; Kerr, Catherine E; Jacobson, Eric E; Kirsch, Irving; Schyner, Rosa N; Nam, Bong Hyun; Nguyen, Long T; Park, Min; Rivers, Andrea L; McManus, Claire; Kokkotou, Efi; Drossman, Douglas A; Goldman, Peter; Lembo, Anthony J
• Is Part Of: BMJ. Volume 336:Issue 7651(2008)
• Page Start: 999
• Page End: 1003
• Publication Date: 2008-04-03
• Subjects: Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine; Periodicals; 610
• DOI: 10.1136/bmj.39524.439618.25
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0007-1447

Abstract

Abstract : Objective To investigate whether placebo effects can experimentally be separated into the response to three components—assessment and observation, a therapeutic ritual (placebo treatment), and a supportive patient-practitioner relationship—and then progressively combined to produce incremental clinical improvement in patients with irritable bowel syndrome. To assess the relative magnitude of these components. Design A six week single blind three arm randomised controlled trial. Setting Academic medical centre. Participants 262 adults (76% women), mean (SD) age 39 (14), diagnosed by Rome II criteria for and with a score of ≥150 on the symptom severity scale. Interventions For three weeks either waiting list (observation), placebo acupuncture alone ("limited"), or placebo acupuncture with a patient-practitioner relationship augmented by warmth, attention, and confidence ("augmented"). At three weeks, half of the patients were randomly assigned to continue in their originally assigned group for an additional three weeks. Main outcome measures Global improvement scale (range 1-7), adequate relief of symptoms, symptom severity score, and quality of life. Results At three weeks, scores on the global improvement scale were 3.8 (SD 1.0) v 4.3 (SD 1.4) v 5.0 (SD 1.3) for waiting list versus "limited" versus "augmented, " respectively (P<0.001 for trend). The proportion of patients reporting adequate relief showed a similar pattern: 28% on waiting list, 44% in limited group, and 62% in augmented group (P<0.001 for trend). The same trend in response existed in symptom severity score (30 (63) v 42 (67) v 82 (89), P<0.001) and quality of life (3.6 (8.1) v 4.1 (9.4) v 9.3 (14.0), P<0.001). All pairwise comparisons between augmented and limited patient-practitioner relationship were significant: global improvement scale (P<0.001), adequate relief of symptoms (P<0.001), symptom severity score (P=0.007), quality of life (P=0.01).Results were similar at six week follow-up. Conclusion Factors contributing to the placebo effect can be progressively combined in a manner resembling a graded dose escalation of component parts. Non-specific effects can produce statistically and clinically significant outcomes and the patient-practitioner relationship is the most robust component. Trial registration Clinical Trials NCT00065403 .