Accurate pain reporting training diminishes the placebo response: Results from a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial.

Analgesic trials frequently fail to demonstrate efficacy of drugs known to be efficacious. Poor pain reporting accuracy is a possible source for this low essay-sensitivity. We report the effects of Accurate-Pain-Reporting-Training (APRT) on the placebo response in a trial of Pregabalin for painful-d...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Roi Treister, Oluwadolapo D Lawal, Jonathan D Shecter, Nevil Khurana, John Bothmer, Mark Field, Steven E Harte, Grant H Kruger, Nathaniel P Katz
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2018-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0197844&type=printable
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849766372974788608
author Roi Treister
Oluwadolapo D Lawal
Jonathan D Shecter
Nevil Khurana
John Bothmer
Mark Field
Steven E Harte
Grant H Kruger
Nathaniel P Katz
author_facet Roi Treister
Oluwadolapo D Lawal
Jonathan D Shecter
Nevil Khurana
John Bothmer
Mark Field
Steven E Harte
Grant H Kruger
Nathaniel P Katz
author_sort Roi Treister
collection DOAJ
description Analgesic trials frequently fail to demonstrate efficacy of drugs known to be efficacious. Poor pain reporting accuracy is a possible source for this low essay-sensitivity. We report the effects of Accurate-Pain-Reporting-Training (APRT) on the placebo response in a trial of Pregabalin for painful-diabetic-neuropathy. The study was a two-stage randomized, double-blind trial: In Stage-1 (Training) subjects were randomized to APRT or No-Training. The APRT participants received feedback on the accuracy of their pain reports in response to mechanical stimuli, measured by R-square score. In Stage-2 (Evaluation) all subjects entered a placebo-controlled, cross-over trial. Primary (24-h average pain intensity) and secondary (current, 24-h worst, and 24-h walking pain intensity) outcome measures were reported. Fifty-one participants completed the study. APRT patients (n = 28) demonstrated significant (p = 0.036) increases in R-square scores. The APRT group demonstrated significantly (p = 0.018) lower placebo response (0.29 ± 1.21 vs. 1.48 ± 2.21, mean difference ± SD = -1.19±1.73). No relationships were found between the R-square scores and changes in pain intensity in the treatment arm. In summary, our training successfully increased pain reporting accuracy and resulted in a diminished placebo response. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.
format Article
id doaj-art-3fd794fb79e548b4a71f448058a3f037
institution DOAJ
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2018-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-3fd794fb79e548b4a71f448058a3f0372025-08-20T03:04:36ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032018-01-01135e019784410.1371/journal.pone.0197844Accurate pain reporting training diminishes the placebo response: Results from a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial.Roi TreisterOluwadolapo D LawalJonathan D ShecterNevil KhuranaJohn BothmerMark FieldSteven E HarteGrant H KrugerNathaniel P KatzAnalgesic trials frequently fail to demonstrate efficacy of drugs known to be efficacious. Poor pain reporting accuracy is a possible source for this low essay-sensitivity. We report the effects of Accurate-Pain-Reporting-Training (APRT) on the placebo response in a trial of Pregabalin for painful-diabetic-neuropathy. The study was a two-stage randomized, double-blind trial: In Stage-1 (Training) subjects were randomized to APRT or No-Training. The APRT participants received feedback on the accuracy of their pain reports in response to mechanical stimuli, measured by R-square score. In Stage-2 (Evaluation) all subjects entered a placebo-controlled, cross-over trial. Primary (24-h average pain intensity) and secondary (current, 24-h worst, and 24-h walking pain intensity) outcome measures were reported. Fifty-one participants completed the study. APRT patients (n = 28) demonstrated significant (p = 0.036) increases in R-square scores. The APRT group demonstrated significantly (p = 0.018) lower placebo response (0.29 ± 1.21 vs. 1.48 ± 2.21, mean difference ± SD = -1.19±1.73). No relationships were found between the R-square scores and changes in pain intensity in the treatment arm. In summary, our training successfully increased pain reporting accuracy and resulted in a diminished placebo response. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0197844&type=printable
spellingShingle Roi Treister
Oluwadolapo D Lawal
Jonathan D Shecter
Nevil Khurana
John Bothmer
Mark Field
Steven E Harte
Grant H Kruger
Nathaniel P Katz
Accurate pain reporting training diminishes the placebo response: Results from a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial.
PLoS ONE
title Accurate pain reporting training diminishes the placebo response: Results from a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial.
title_full Accurate pain reporting training diminishes the placebo response: Results from a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial.
title_fullStr Accurate pain reporting training diminishes the placebo response: Results from a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial.
title_full_unstemmed Accurate pain reporting training diminishes the placebo response: Results from a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial.
title_short Accurate pain reporting training diminishes the placebo response: Results from a randomised, double-blind, crossover trial.
title_sort accurate pain reporting training diminishes the placebo response results from a randomised double blind crossover trial
url https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0197844&type=printable
work_keys_str_mv AT roitreister accuratepainreportingtrainingdiminishestheplaceboresponseresultsfromarandomiseddoubleblindcrossovertrial
AT oluwadolapodlawal accuratepainreportingtrainingdiminishestheplaceboresponseresultsfromarandomiseddoubleblindcrossovertrial
AT jonathandshecter accuratepainreportingtrainingdiminishestheplaceboresponseresultsfromarandomiseddoubleblindcrossovertrial
AT nevilkhurana accuratepainreportingtrainingdiminishestheplaceboresponseresultsfromarandomiseddoubleblindcrossovertrial
AT johnbothmer accuratepainreportingtrainingdiminishestheplaceboresponseresultsfromarandomiseddoubleblindcrossovertrial
AT markfield accuratepainreportingtrainingdiminishestheplaceboresponseresultsfromarandomiseddoubleblindcrossovertrial
AT steveneharte accuratepainreportingtrainingdiminishestheplaceboresponseresultsfromarandomiseddoubleblindcrossovertrial
AT granthkruger accuratepainreportingtrainingdiminishestheplaceboresponseresultsfromarandomiseddoubleblindcrossovertrial
AT nathanielpkatz accuratepainreportingtrainingdiminishestheplaceboresponseresultsfromarandomiseddoubleblindcrossovertrial