Chavarria Victor, Vian João, Pereira Círia, Data-Franco João, Fernandes Brisa S, Berk Michael, Dodd Seetal
Institut de Neuropsiquiatria i Adiccions (INAD), Parc de salut Mar (PSM), Barcelona, Spain.
Psychiatry and Mental Health Department, Centro Hospitalar Lisboa Norte, Lisbon, Portugal; Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal.
Clin Ther. 2017 Mar;39(3):477-486. doi: 10.1016/j.clinthera.2017.01.031. Epub 2017 Feb 23.
This overview focuses on placebo and nocebo effects in clinical trials and routine care. Our goal was to propose strategies to improve outcomes in clinical practice, maximizing placebo effects and reducing nocebo effects, as well as managing these phenomena in clinical trials.
A narrative literature search of PubMed was conducted (January 1980-September 2016). Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, observational studies, and case series that had an emphasis on placebo or nocebo effects in clinical practice were included in the qualitative synthesis. Search terms included: placebo, nocebo, clinical, clinical trial, clinical setting, placebo effect, nocebo effect, adverse effects, and treatment outcomes. This search was augmented by a manual search of the references of the key articles and the related literature.
Placebo and nocebo effects are psychobiological events imputable to the therapeutic context. Placebo is defined as an inert substance that provokes perceived benefits, whereas the term nocebo is used when an inert substance causes perceived harm. Their major mechanisms are expectancy and classical conditioning. Placebo is used in several fields of medicine, as a diagnostic tool or to reduce drug dosage. Placebo/nocebo effects are difficult to disentangle from the natural course of illness or the actual effects of a new drug in a clinical trial. There are known strategies to enhance clinical results by manipulating expectations and conditioning.
Placebo and nocebo effects occur frequently and are clinically significant but are underrecognized in clinical practice. Physicians should be able to recognize these phenomena and master tactics on how to manage these effects to enhance the quality of clinical practice.
本综述聚焦于临床试验及常规医疗中的安慰剂和反安慰剂效应。我们的目标是提出策略,以改善临床实践中的治疗效果,最大化安慰剂效应并减少反安慰剂效应,同时在临床试验中应对这些现象。
对PubMed进行叙述性文献检索(1980年1月至2016年9月)。定性综合分析纳入了强调临床实践中安慰剂或反安慰剂效应的系统评价、随机对照试验、观察性研究及病例系列。检索词包括:安慰剂、反安慰剂、临床、临床试验、临床环境、安慰剂效应、反安慰剂效应、不良反应及治疗结果。通过手动检索关键文章及相关文献的参考文献对此次检索进行补充。
安慰剂和反安慰剂效应是可归因于治疗环境的心理生物学事件。安慰剂被定义为引发感知益处的惰性物质,而当惰性物质导致感知伤害时则使用反安慰剂这一术语。其主要机制是期望和经典条件作用。安慰剂在医学的多个领域被用作诊断工具或用于减少药物剂量。在临床试验中,安慰剂/反安慰剂效应很难与疾病的自然进程或新药的实际效果区分开来。已知有通过操纵期望和条件作用来提高临床疗效的策略。
安慰剂和反安慰剂效应频繁发生且具有临床意义,但在临床实践中未得到充分认识。医生应能够识别这些现象并掌握应对这些效应的策略,以提高临床实践质量。