22
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The use of pure and impure placebo interventions in primary care - a qualitative approach

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Placebos play an important role in clinical trials and several surveys have shown that they are also common in daily practice. Previous research focused primarily on the frequency of placebo use in outpatient care. Our aim was to explore physicians' views on the use of placebos in daily practice, whereby distinction was made between pure placebos (substances with no pharmacological effect, e.g. sugar pills) and impure placebos (substances with pharmacological effect but not on the condition being treated, e.g. antibiotics in viral infections or vitamins).

          Methods

          We performed semi-structured interviews with a sample of twelve primary care physicians (PCPs). The interview addressed individual definitions of a placebo, attitudes towards placebos and the participants' reasons for prescribing them. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using qualitative content analysis.

          Results

          The definition of a placebo given by the majority of the PCPs in our study was one which actually only describes pure placebos. This definition, combined with the fact that most impure placebos were not regarded as placebos at all, means that most of the participating PCPs were not aware of the extent to which placebos are used in daily practice. The PCPs stated that they use placebos (both pure and impure) mainly in the case of non-severe diseases for which there was often no satisfactory somatic explanation. According to the PCPs, cases like this are often treated by complementary and alternative therapies and these, too, are associated with placebo effects. However, all PCPs felt that the ethical aspects of such treatment were unclear and they were unsure as to how to communicate the use of placebos to their patients. Most of them would appreciate ethical guidelines on how to deal with this issue.

          Conclusions

          Many PCPs seem to be unaware that some of the drugs they prescribe are classified as impure placebos. Perceptions of effectiveness and doubts about the legal and ethical aspects of the use of placebos by PCPs may discourage their application. Dissemination of guidelines and consensus papers may be one approach, but it has to be acknowledged that the topic itself is in conflict with the PCPs' perception of themselves as professional and reliable physicians.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Response expectancies in placebo analgesia and their clinical relevance.

          Response expectancies have been proposed as the major determinant of placebo effects. Here we report that different expectations produce different analgesic effects which in turn can be harnessed in clinical practice. Thoracotomized patients were treated with buprenorphine on request for 3 consecutive days, together with a basal intravenous infusion of saline solution. However, the symbolic meaning of this basal infusion was changed in three different groups of patients. The first group was told nothing about any analgesic effect (natural history). The second group was told that the basal infusion was either a powerful painkiller or a placebo (classic double-blind administration). The third group was told that the basal infusion was a potent painkiller (deceptive administration). Therefore, whereas the analgesic treatment was exactly the same in the three groups, the verbal instructions about the basal infusion differed. The placebo effect of the saline basal infusion was measured by recording the doses of buprenorphine requested over the three-days treatment. We found that the double-blind group showed a reduction of buprenorphine requests compared to the natural history group. However, this reduction was even larger in the deceptive administration group. Overall, after 3 days of placebo infusion, the first group received 11.55 mg of buprenorphine, the second group 9.15 mg, and the third group 7.65 mg. Despite these dose differences, analgesia was the same in the three groups. These results indicate that different verbal instructions about certain and uncertain expectations of analgesia produce different placebo analgesic effects, which in turn trigger a dramatic change of behaviour leading to a significant reduction of opioid intake.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Frequency and circumstances of placebo use in clinical practice - a systematic review of empirical studies

            Background The use of placebo interventions outside clinical trials is ethically, professionally and legally controversial. Little is known about the frequency and circumstances of placebo use in clinical practice. Our aim was to summarize the available empirical studies addressing these issues. Methods We searched PubMed and EMBASE from inception to July 2009 in order to identify cross-sectional surveys, qualitative or longitudinal studies among health care professionals, students or patients which investigated at least one of the following issues - frequency of placebo use or attitudes to, or motivations for, the use of placebo interventions. At least two reviewers extracted information on the study methods, participants and findings. Descriptive summaries were prepared in an iterative process by at least two reviewers per study. Results Twenty-two studies from 12 different countries met the inclusion criteria. Most studies had relevant shortcomings. The proportion of respondents reporting that they had applied 'pure' placebos (for example, saline injection) during their professional life varied between 17% and 80% among physicians and between 51% and 100% among nurses, but it seems that the actual frequency of such use seems to be rare. The use of 'impure' or 'active' placebos (for example, antibiotics for viral infections) is likely to be much more frequent. However, it is impossible to make a reliable estimation because there is no agreement of what an impure placebo might be. Studies using qualitative methods or asking participants to judge case examples suggest that motivations and attitudes towards placebo use are complex and health care providers are often faced with a dilemma. Conclusions Although the available evidence is incomplete and confusing at times there can be little doubt that the prevalence of placebo use outside of clinical trials is not negligible and that views and attitudes on placebos use differ considerably among individuals, both health care professionals and patients. Further research is needed to clarify these issues.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Do "placebo responders" exist?

              The placebo effect has been the subject of much controversy. For a scientific investigation of placebo effects to advance it is important to establish whether a placebo response in any particular illness is reliable - i.e., if there is a response to a single placebo administration there will also be a placebo response to the repeated administration of a similar placebo in similar conditions. A positive answer would allow more sophisticated clinical trial designs and more precise basic research experiments on the placebo effect. This article reviews experiments that used multiple administrations of placebo to answer the question "do reliable placebo responders exist?" This paper also examines the evidence for the existence of a consistent placebo responder, i.e. a person who responds to placebo in one situation will respond in another condition or using a different type of placebo ritual. Much of the existing evidence for these two questions was performed before 1967. This early evidence is contradictory, methodologically weak and is sufficiently old to be considered medical history. Since 1969, at least eight experiments exposed asthma patients to multiple administrations of placebo given with deceptive suggestions that the "treatment" was an active medication. While the results of this research are not unequivocal, and may not be equivalent to non-deceptive conditions, this line of inquiry suggests that if a reliable and consistent placebo response exists it could be detected within this population. Finally, this paper proposes one model to rigorously investigate the stability of placebo responses.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Fam Pract
                BMC Family Practice
                BioMed Central
                1471-2296
                2011
                24 March 2011
                : 12
                : 11
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Institute of General Practice and Health Services Research, University of Zurich, Pestalozzistrasse 24, 8091 Zurich, Switzerland
                [2 ]Institute of Biomedical Ethics, University of Zurich, Pestalozzistrasse 24, 8032 Zurich, Switzerland
                Article
                1471-2296-12-11
                10.1186/1471-2296-12-11
                3068943
                21435197
                45184670-71a4-4b3f-a171-e81838de9d38
                Copyright ©2011 Fent et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 14 September 2010
                : 24 March 2011
                Categories
                Research Article

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article