Birch Stephen
Stichting (Foundation) for the Study of Traditional East Asian Medicine (STEAM), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J Altern Complement Med. 2006 Apr;12(3):303-10. doi: 10.1089/acm.2006.12.303.
Researchers examining the efficacy of medical procedures make assumptions about the nature of placebo. From these assumptions they select the sham interventions to be used in their trials. However, placebo is not well defined. A number of definitions are contradictory and sometimes misleading. This leads to problems in sham-controlled studies of medical procedures and difficulties interpreting their results. The author explores some of the contradictory definitions of placebo and assumptions and consequences of these. Principal among these is the assumption that the placebo is inert when it is not, which introduces bias against the tested medical procedures and devices. To illustrate the problem, the author examines the use of sham procedures in clinical trials of the medical procedures surgery and acupuncture in which the sham was assumed to be inert but was not. Trials of surgery and acupuncture should be re-examined in light of this.
研究医疗程序疗效的人员会对安慰剂的性质做出假设。基于这些假设,他们选择在试验中使用的假干预措施。然而,安慰剂的定义并不明确。许多定义相互矛盾,有时还会产生误导。这导致了医疗程序的假对照研究出现问题,也难以解释其结果。作者探讨了一些安慰剂相互矛盾的定义以及这些定义所产生的假设和后果。其中最主要的是认为安慰剂无活性的假设,而实际并非如此,这会对受试的医疗程序和设备产生偏见。为说明这一问题,作者研究了在手术和针灸等医疗程序的临床试验中假程序的使用情况,在这些试验中,假程序被假定为无活性,但实际并非如此。鉴于此,应对手术和针灸的试验重新进行审视。