Bonnie M Kaas1, Casey Jo Humbyrd2,3, Alexander Pantelyat1. 1. Department of Neurology Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Baltimore MD. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Baltimore MD. 3. The Berman Institute of Bioethics Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Baltimore MD.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Functional movement disorders are common and disabling neurologic conditions. Patients with functional neurologic disorders represent a large proportion of neurology clinic referrals, and limited availability of subspecialty care creates a considerable burden for the healthcare system. These conditions are currently treated with a combination of physical therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy, with variable success. METHODS: We searched the Medline database for studies on the epidemiology and physiology of functional movement disorders, as well as those on the placebo effect in movement disorders. We reviewed and summarized the literature on these topics and explored ethical issues concerning the administration of placebos to patients with functional movement disorders. RESULTS: Studies of placebos, particularly in patients with movement disorders, have shown that these "inert" agents can provide demonstrable neurophysiologic benefits, even in open-label studies. Physician surveys have shown that many administer placebos for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, although there are ethical concerns about this practice. We used a principle-based approach and reviewed ethical arguments for (justice and beneficence) and against (non-maleficence and autonomy) the use of placebos in functional movement disorders. In this context, we argue for the importance of the therapeutic alliance in preserving patient autonomy while exploring the potential benefits of placebo therapy. CONCLUSIONS: An ethical argument is presented in support of nondeceptive clinical placebo use for the treatment of functional movement disorders. Patient and clinician attitudes regarding the use of placebos should be investigated before placebo-therapy trials are conducted.
BACKGROUND: Functional movement disorders are common and disabling neurologic conditions. Patients with functional neurologic disorders represent a large proportion of neurology clinic referrals, and limited availability of subspecialty care creates a considerable burden for the healthcare system. These conditions are currently treated with a combination of physical therapy and cognitive behavioral therapy, with variable success. METHODS: We searched the Medline database for studies on the epidemiology and physiology of functional movement disorders, as well as those on the placebo effect in movement disorders. We reviewed and summarized the literature on these topics and explored ethical issues concerning the administration of placebos to patients with functional movement disorders. RESULTS: Studies of placebos, particularly in patients with movement disorders, have shown that these "inert" agents can provide demonstrable neurophysiologic benefits, even in open-label studies. Physician surveys have shown that many administer placebos for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes, although there are ethical concerns about this practice. We used a principle-based approach and reviewed ethical arguments for (justice and beneficence) and against (non-maleficence and autonomy) the use of placebos in functional movement disorders. In this context, we argue for the importance of the therapeutic alliance in preserving patient autonomy while exploring the potential benefits of placebo therapy. CONCLUSIONS: An ethical argument is presented in support of nondeceptive clinical placebo use for the treatment of functional movement disorders. Patient and clinician attitudes regarding the use of placebos should be investigated before placebo-therapy trials are conducted.
Entities:
Keywords:
ethics; functional movement disorder; placebo; psychogenic
Authors: J Stone; A Carson; R Duncan; R Roberts; C Warlow; C Hibberd; R Coleman; R Cull; G Murray; A Pelosi; J Cavanagh; K Matthews; R Goldbeck; R Smyth; J Walker; M Sharpe Journal: Clin Neurol Neurosurg Date: 2010-06-19 Impact factor: 1.876
Authors: Christopher G Goetz; Joanne Wuu; Michael P McDermott; Charles H Adler; Stanley Fahn; Curt R Freed; Robert A Hauser; Warren C Olanow; Ira Shoulson; P K Tandon; Sue Leurgans Journal: Mov Disord Date: 2008-04-15 Impact factor: 10.338
Authors: Benjamin Stewart; Jon G Dean; Adriana Koek; Jason Chua; Rafael Wabl; Kayla Martin; Naveed Davoodian; Christopher Becker; Mai Himedan; Amanda Kim; Roger Albin; Kelvin L Chou; Vikas Kotagal Journal: Pharmacol Res Perspect Date: 2020-12