Michael H Bernstein1, Cosima Locher2,3,4, Sif Stewart-Ferrer5, Sarah Buergler4, Catherine M DesRoches6, Michelle L Dossett7,8, Franklin G Miller9, Deborah Grose10, Charlotte R Blease6,11. 1. Department of Behavioral & Social Sciences, Center for Alcohol and Addiction Studies, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, Rhode Island, USA. 2. Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care and Pain Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. School of Psychology, University of Plymouth, UK. 4. Division of Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, University of Basel, Switzerland. 5. Research Unit of General Practice, Department of Public Health, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark. 6. General Medicine and Primary Care Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 7. Division of General Internal Medicine and Benson-Henry Institute for Mind Body Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 8. Division of General Internal Medicine, Geriatrics & Bioethics, University of California, Davis, Sacramento, California, USA. 9. Division of Medical Ethics, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, USA. 10. Program in Placebo Studies, Beth Isreal Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 11. School of Psychology, University College Dublin, Ireland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine how primary care physicians define placebo concepts, use placebos in clinical practice, and view open-label placebos (OLPs). DESIGN: Semi-structured focus groups that were audio-recorded and content-coded. METHODS: Two focus groups with a total of 15 primary care physicians occurred at medical centres in the New England region of the United States. Prior experience using placebo treatments and attitudes towards open-label placebos were explored. Themes were analysed using an inductive data-driven approach. RESULTS: Physicians displayed a nuanced understanding of placebos and placebo effects in clinical contexts which sometimes focused on relational factors. Some respondents reported that they prescribed treatments with no known pharmacological effect for certain conditions and symptoms ('impure placebos') and that such prescriptions were more common for pain disorders, functional disorders, and medically unexplained symptoms. Opinions about OLP were mixed: Some viewed OLPs favourably or considered them 'harmless'; however, others strongly rejected OLPs as disrespectful to patients. Other issues in relation to OLPs included the following: lack of guidelines, legal and reputational concerns, and the notion that such treatments would run counter to customary medical practice. CONCLUSIONS: A number of physicians reported prescribing impure placebos in clinical care. Although some primary care physicians were resistant to the possibility of recommending OLPs, others regarded OLPs more favourably, viewing them as potential treatments, albeit with restricted potential. Statement of contribution What is already known? Many physicians report prescribing drugs for the purposes of eliciting a placebo effect. Initial evidence for the efficacy of open-label placebos is promising. What does this study add? A more nuanced description of the circumstances under which primary care physicians report placebo prescribing. A qualitative account of physician attitudes about using open-label placebos in clinical practice.
OBJECTIVE: To examine how primary care physicians define placebo concepts, use placebos in clinical practice, and view open-label placebos (OLPs). DESIGN: Semi-structured focus groups that were audio-recorded and content-coded. METHODS: Two focus groups with a total of 15 primary care physicians occurred at medical centres in the New England region of the United States. Prior experience using placebo treatments and attitudes towards open-label placebos were explored. Themes were analysed using an inductive data-driven approach. RESULTS: Physicians displayed a nuanced understanding of placebos and placebo effects in clinical contexts which sometimes focused on relational factors. Some respondents reported that they prescribed treatments with no known pharmacological effect for certain conditions and symptoms ('impure placebos') and that such prescriptions were more common for pain disorders, functional disorders, and medically unexplained symptoms. Opinions about OLP were mixed: Some viewed OLPs favourably or considered them 'harmless'; however, others strongly rejected OLPs as disrespectful to patients. Other issues in relation to OLPs included the following: lack of guidelines, legal and reputational concerns, and the notion that such treatments would run counter to customary medical practice. CONCLUSIONS: A number of physicians reported prescribing impure placebos in clinical care. Although some primary care physicians were resistant to the possibility of recommending OLPs, others regarded OLPs more favourably, viewing them as potential treatments, albeit with restricted potential. Statement of contribution What is already known? Many physicians report prescribing drugs for the purposes of eliciting a placebo effect. Initial evidence for the efficacy of open-label placebos is promising. What does this study add? A more nuanced description of the circumstances under which primary care physicians report placebo prescribing. A qualitative account of physician attitudes about using open-label placebos in clinical practice.
Authors: Mohana Ratnapalan; Beverly Coghlan; Mengxin Tan; Hazel Everitt; Adam W A Geraghty; Paul Little; George Lewith; Felicity L Bishop Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Andrea W M Evers; Luana Colloca; Charlotte Blease; Marco Annoni; Lauren Y Atlas; Fabrizio Benedetti; Ulrike Bingel; Christian Büchel; Claudia Carvalho; Ben Colagiuri; Alia J Crum; Paul Enck; Jens Gaab; Andrew L Geers; Jeremy Howick; Karin B Jensen; Irving Kirsch; Karin Meissner; Vitaly Napadow; Kaya J Peerdeman; Amir Raz; Winfried Rief; Lene Vase; Tor D Wager; Bruce E Wampold; Katja Weimer; Katja Wiech; Ted J Kaptchuk; Regine Klinger; John M Kelley Journal: Psychother Psychosom Date: 2018-06-12 Impact factor: 17.659
Authors: Julia Kirchhof; Liubov Petrakova; Alexandra Brinkhoff; Sven Benson; Justine Schmidt; Maike Unteroberdörster; Benjamin Wilde; Ted J Kaptchuk; Oliver Witzke; Manfred Schedlowski Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2018-04-02 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Michael H Bernstein; Maayan Rosenfield; Nathaniel Fuchs; Molly Magill; Charlotte R Blease; Francesca L Beaudoin; Josiah D Rich; Karolina Wartolowska; Richard M Terek Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2021-10-05 Impact factor: 3.006