Advertisement

Factors Affecting Placebo Acceptability: Deception, Outcome, and Disease Severity

  • Nkaku R. Kisaalita
    Affiliations
    Center for Pain Research and Behavioral Health, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
    Search for articles by this author
  • Daniela Roditi
    Affiliations
    Center for Pain Research and Behavioral Health, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
    Search for articles by this author
  • Michael E. Robinson
    Correspondence
    Address reprint requests to Michael E. Robinson, Center for Pain Research and Behavioral Health, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Florida, P.O. Box 100165, Gainesville, FL 32610-0165.
    Affiliations
    Center for Pain Research and Behavioral Health, Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
    Search for articles by this author

      Abstract

      A burgeoning body of evidence supports the efficacy and elucidates the mechanisms of placebo analgesia. Debate persists, however, concerning their ethical use, with many of the present arguments being philosophically based. The present web-based study empirically investigated the acceptability of an analgesic placebo treatment. Participants (103) responded to vignettes depicting patients receiving a placebo analgesic. We experimentally manipulated: 1) placebo treatment instructions (level of deception); 2) treatment outcome; and 3) patients’ pain severity. Participants rated vignettes on outcome measures of deception, physician-patient relationship, and patient mood. Participants then characterized a range of placebo acceptability through ratings of deceptiveness, effectiveness, and negative consequences. Results showed that placebos described as “medication shown to be a powerful analgesic in some people” were equally deceptive as those described as “standard drug treatment.” Ratings of patient mood and physician approval were determined as much by treatment instruction as by treatment outcome and an analgesic response mitigated the negative consequences of deceptive administration. Participants tolerated moderate effectiveness and considerable negative consequences in an acceptable placebo, although results suggest lay individuals may not have a sophisticated conceptualization of placebo effectiveness. Studies altering individuals’ understanding of placebo effectiveness and mechanisms are needed to identify additional factors determining placebo acceptability.

      Perspective

      This study represents an empirical examination of analgesic placebo acceptability among lay individuals. This article is the first to systematically manipulate deception, treatment outcome, and disease severity to determine how these factors interact to differentially determine placebo acceptability—a highly relevant finding that informs the clinical use of placebo.

      Key words

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to The Journal of Pain
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Asai A.
        • Ohnishi M.
        • Nishigaki E.
        • Sekimoto M.
        • Fukuhara S.
        • Fukui T.
        Focus group interviews examining attitudes towards medical research among the Japanese: A qualitative study.
        Bioethics. 2004; 18: 448-470
        • Bortolotti L.
        • Mameli M.
        Deception in psychology: Moral costs and benefits of unsought self-knowledge.
        Account Res. 2006; 13: 259-275
        • Brody H.
        The lie that heals: The ethics of giving placebos.
        Ann Intern Med. 1982; 97: 112-118
        • Cahana A.
        • Romagnioli S.
        Not all placebos are the same: A debate on the ethics of placebo use in clinical trials versus clinical practice.
        J Anesth. 2007; 21: 102-105
        • Capps B.
        Balancing ethical research and placebo administration.
        J Psychopharmacol. 2008; 22: 600-602
        • Chen G.F.
        • Johnson M.
        Patients’ attitudes to the use of placebos: Results from a New Zealand survey.
        N Z Med J. 2009; 122: 35-46
        • Chung S.K.
        • Price D.D.
        • Verne G.N.
        • Robinson M.E.
        Revelation of a personal placebo response: Its effects on mood, attitudes and future placebo responding.
        Pain. 2007; 132: 281-288
        • Emanuel E.J.
        • Miller F.G.
        The ethics of placebo-controlled trials—A middle ground.
        N Engl J Med. 2001; 345: 915-919
        • Fassler M.
        • Gnadinger M.
        • Rosemann T.
        • Biller-Andorno N.
        Use of placebo interventions among Swiss primary care providers.
        BMC Health Serv Res. 2009; 9: 15
        • Fassler M.
        • Meissner K.
        • Schneider A.
        • Linde K.
        Frequency and circumstances of placebo use in clinical practice—a systematic review of empirical studies.
        BMC Medicine. 2010; 8: 15
        • Finniss D.G.
        • Kaptchuk T.J.
        • Miller F.G.
        • Benedetti F.
        Biological, clinical, and ethical advances of placebo effects.
        The Lancet. 2010; 375: 686-695
        • Foddy B.
        A duty to deceive: Placebos in clinical practice.
        Am J Bioeth. 2009; 9: 4-12
        • Herrera C.D.
        Ethics, deception, and ‘those Milgram experiments’.
        J Appl Philos. 2001; 18: 245-256
        • Hirsh A.T.
        • Waxenberg L.B.
        • Atchison J.W.
        • Gremillion H.A.
        • Robinson M.E.
        Evidence for sex differences in the relationships of pain, mood, and disability.
        J Pain. 2006; 7: 592-601
        • Hrobjartsson A.
        • Norup M.
        The use of placebo Interventions in medical practice—a national questionnaire survey of danish clinicians.
        Eval Health Prof. 2003; 26: 153-165
        • Korn J.H.
        Judgments of acceptability of deception in psychological research.
        J Gen Psychol. 1987; 114: 205-216
        • Korn J.H.
        • Illusions of Reality
        A History of Deception in Social Psychology.
        1st edition. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY1997
        • Kovach K.
        Distinguishing dilemmas in the ethics of placebo-controlled trials.
        Am J Bioeth. 2002; 2: 32-33
        • Lichtenberg P.
        • Heresco-Levy U.
        • Nitzan U.
        The ethics of the placebo in clinical practice.
        J Med Ethics. 2004; 30: 551-554
        • Martin A.L.
        • Katz J.
        Inclusion of authorized deception in the informed consent process does not affect the magnitude of the placebo effect for experimentally induced pain.
        Pain. 2010; 149: 208-215
        • Miller F.G.
        • Brody H.
        What makes placebo-controlled trials unethical?.
        Am J Bioeth. 2002; 2: 3-9
        • Miller F.G.
        • Wendler D.
        • Swartzman L.C.
        Deception in research on the placebo effect.
        PLoS Medicine. 2005; 2: 853-858
        • Miller F.G.
        • Gluck J.P.
        • Wendler D.
        Debriefing and accountability in deceptive research.
        Kennedy Inst Ethics J. 2008; 18: 235-251
        • Miller F.G.
        • Colloca L.
        The legitamacy of placebo treatments in clinical practice: Evidence and ethics.
        Am J Bioeth. 2009; 9: 39-49
        • Nitzan U.
        • Lichtenberg P.
        Questionnaire survey on use of placebo.
        BMJ. 2004; 329: 944-946
        • Powell T.
        • Bailey J.
        Against placebos.
        Am J Bioeth. 2009; 9: 23-25
        • Price D.D.
        • Craggs J.
        • Verne N.
        • Perlstein W.M.
        • Robinson M.E.
        Placebo analgesia is accompanied by large reductions in pain-related brain activity in irritable bowel syndrome patients.
        Pain. 2007; 127: 63-72
      1. Price DD, Finniss DG, Benedetti F: A comprehensive review of the placebo effect: Recent advances and current thoughts. Annu Rev Psychol 59:2.1-2.26, 2008

        • Robinson M.E.
        • Riley III, J.L.
        The role of emotion in pain.
        in: Gatchel R.J. Turk D.C. Psychosocial Factors In Pain: Critical Perspectives. 1st edition. Guilford Press, New York, NY1999: 74-88
        • Sherman R.
        • Hickner J.
        Academic physicians use placebos in clinical practice and believe in the mind-body connection.
        J Gen Intern Med. 2008; 23: 7-10
        • Sullivan M.
        • Terman G.W.
        • Peck B.
        • Correll D.J.
        • Rich B.
        • Clark W.C.
        • Latta K.
        • Lebovits A.
        • Gebhart G.
        APS position statement on the use of placebos in pain management.
        J Pain. 2005; 6: 215-217
        • Tilburt J.C.
        • Emanuel E.J.
        • Kaptchuk T.J.
        • Curlin F.A.
        • Miller F.G.
        Prescribing “placebo treatments”: Results of national survey of US internists and rheumatologists.
        BMJ. 2008; 337: a2435
        • Vase L.
        • Robinson M.E.
        • Verne G.N.
        • Price D.D.
        The contributions of suggestion, desire, and expectation to placebo effects in irritable bowel syndrome patients: An empirical investigation.
        Pain. 2003; 105: 17-25
        • Vase L.
        • Robinson M.E.
        • Verne G.N.
        • Price D.D.
        Increased placebo analgesia over time in irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) patients is associated with desire and expectation but not endogenous opioid mechanisms.
        Pain. 2005; 115: 338-347