Are some people more susceptible to placebos? A systematic review and meta-analysis of inter-individual variability in musculoskeletal pain.

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2024-11-27 DOI:10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104745
Tobias Saueressig, Patrick J Owen, Hugo Pedder, Svenja Kaczorowski, Clint T Miller, Lars Donath, Daniel L Belavy
{"title":"Are some people more susceptible to placebos? A systematic review and meta-analysis of inter-individual variability in musculoskeletal pain.","authors":"Tobias Saueressig, Patrick J Owen, Hugo Pedder, Svenja Kaczorowski, Clint T Miller, Lars Donath, Daniel L Belavy","doi":"10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104745","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Existing data suggest placebo responses to treatments are small, but some people may be more likely to respond. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interindividual variability in response to placebo interventions MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, CENTRAL, and SPORTDiscus were searched from inception to September 2023. Trial registry searches, citation tracking, and searches for prior systematic reviews were completed. The PEDro scale assessed study quality. Random effects robust variance estimation estimated the log variability ratio (VR), identifying subgroups with varying responses. Twenty-six studies were included, comprising various musculoskeletal pain conditions. Analysis of pain intensity (VR: 1.06, 95%-confidence interval (CI):[0.97; 1.16], 95%-prediction interval (PI):[0.75; 1.51], p = 0.17, k = 26 studies, N = 52 outcomes, GRADE: low), physical function (VR: 1.14, 95%-CI:[0.97; 1.34], 95%-PI:[0.62; 2.11], p = 0.11, k = 19, N = 40, GRADE: low), and health-related quality of life (VR: 1.14, 95%-CI:[0.91; 1.41], 95%-PI:[0.72; 1.80], p = 0.19, k = 7, N = 13, GRADE: low) outcomes revealed minimal, non-statistically significant variability in placebo response compared to control. However, wide prediction intervals suggest uncertainty regarding individual response patterns. There are likely no distinct subgroups of people who are more likely to respond to placebo interventions in musculoskeletal pain; although the available data limits the certainty of this assessment. Future work should consider individual participant data meta-analyses to better elucidate potential responder subgroups and optimize treatment strategies for musculoskeletal pain. PERSPECTIVE: This study systematically reviewed and analyzed RCTs to assess interindividual variability in placebo responses for musculoskeletal pain. Findings suggest minimal variability in placebo response, with no distinct subgroups more likely to respond. Wide prediction intervals indicate uncertainty, highlighting the need for future individual participant data meta-analyses to better elucidate potential responder subgroups.</p>","PeriodicalId":51095,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain","volume":" ","pages":"104745"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104745","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Existing data suggest placebo responses to treatments are small, but some people may be more likely to respond. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on interindividual variability in response to placebo interventions MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science Core Collection, CENTRAL, and SPORTDiscus were searched from inception to September 2023. Trial registry searches, citation tracking, and searches for prior systematic reviews were completed. The PEDro scale assessed study quality. Random effects robust variance estimation estimated the log variability ratio (VR), identifying subgroups with varying responses. Twenty-six studies were included, comprising various musculoskeletal pain conditions. Analysis of pain intensity (VR: 1.06, 95%-confidence interval (CI):[0.97; 1.16], 95%-prediction interval (PI):[0.75; 1.51], p = 0.17, k = 26 studies, N = 52 outcomes, GRADE: low), physical function (VR: 1.14, 95%-CI:[0.97; 1.34], 95%-PI:[0.62; 2.11], p = 0.11, k = 19, N = 40, GRADE: low), and health-related quality of life (VR: 1.14, 95%-CI:[0.91; 1.41], 95%-PI:[0.72; 1.80], p = 0.19, k = 7, N = 13, GRADE: low) outcomes revealed minimal, non-statistically significant variability in placebo response compared to control. However, wide prediction intervals suggest uncertainty regarding individual response patterns. There are likely no distinct subgroups of people who are more likely to respond to placebo interventions in musculoskeletal pain; although the available data limits the certainty of this assessment. Future work should consider individual participant data meta-analyses to better elucidate potential responder subgroups and optimize treatment strategies for musculoskeletal pain. PERSPECTIVE: This study systematically reviewed and analyzed RCTs to assess interindividual variability in placebo responses for musculoskeletal pain. Findings suggest minimal variability in placebo response, with no distinct subgroups more likely to respond. Wide prediction intervals indicate uncertainty, highlighting the need for future individual participant data meta-analyses to better elucidate potential responder subgroups.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Pain
Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
7.50%
发文量
441
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pain publishes original articles related to all aspects of pain, including clinical and basic research, patient care, education, and health policy. Articles selected for publication in the Journal are most commonly reports of original clinical research or reports of original basic research. In addition, invited critical reviews, including meta analyses of drugs for pain management, invited commentaries on reviews, and exceptional case studies are published in the Journal. The mission of the Journal is to improve the care of patients in pain by providing a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and other health professionals to publish original research.
期刊最新文献
Acupuncture in postoperative recovery: Exploring individual differences, long-term effects, and synergistic approaches Are some people more susceptible to placebos? A systematic review and meta-analysis of inter-individual variability in musculoskeletal pain. Mixed Evidence for the Relationship Between HIV Stigma and Pain in Two Studies of People with HIV in Florida. Clinical phenotype and management of sound-induced pain: Insights from adults with pain hyperacusis Neighborhood disadvantage and pain-related experiences in a pain psychology clinic: The mediating roles of pain catastrophizing and pain-related fear
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1