Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

User menu

  • Log in
  • Subscribe
  • Contact Us
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
  • ERS Publications
    • European Respiratory Journal
    • ERJ Open Research
    • European Respiratory Review
    • Breathe
    • ERS Books
    • ERS publications home

Login

European Respiratory Society

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • ERJ Early View
  • Past issues
  • For authors
    • Instructions for authors
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Author FAQs
    • Open access
    • COVID-19 submission information
  • Alerts
  • Podcasts
  • Subscriptions

The importance of differentiating behavioural and psychological treatment effects from placebo in respiratory interventions

Ben Ainsworth, Doug Hardman, Mike Thomas
European Respiratory Journal 2019 53: 1900156; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00156-2019
Ben Ainsworth
1Dept of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: b.ainsworth@bath.ac.uk
Doug Hardman
2Primary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Bath, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mike Thomas
2Primary Care and Population Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Southampton, Bath, UK
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Mike Thomas
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Well-designed nonpharmacological interventions can harness treatment responses seen in the placebo arm http://ow.ly/EgoM30o7k1v

To the Editor:

We read with interest the piece by Pattinson and Wanigasekera [1], discussing the clinical implications of the recent trial reported by Currow et al. [2], which demonstrated parity between sertraline and placebo for improving breathlessness intensity. In particular, Pattinson and Wanigasekera [1] noted that differential response expectations can potentially confound outcomes between otherwise balanced intervention versus placebo-controlled groups. Such expectations have clinical implications: the management of response expectations should be examined and potentially harnessed to improve treatment outcomes for patients with chronic breathlessness, as suggested by Similowski and Serresse [3].

In his excellent paper, Turner [4] reiterated that a placebo-controlled trial compares a particular component of a treatment (often primarily pharmacological) while attempting to keep all other therapeutically relevant components identical. Ideally, such an approach precludes bias and is the gold standard to develop evidence-based medical treatments. However, chronic breathlessness (amongst other complex long-term conditions) is increasingly recognised as dysfunction across multiple interconnected systems. As such it requires holistic treatment that, alongside physiological factors, addresses social, psychological, neurocognitive and behavioural aspects of disease. Therefore, it must be acknowledged that although placebo-controlled trials are designed to examine one specific treatment component, multiple components will impact patient outcomes, and these components may be present in both the treatment and placebo group.

This issue is particularly relevant in respiratory research, in which studies have consistently demonstrated very limited associations between objective physiological impairment and the subjective perceptions of breathlessness severity [5, 6]. Thus, treatment benefits may impact patients through a diverse and complex interacting set of mechanisms (such as neurocognitive predispositions towards subjective symptom severity, as suggested by Ongaro and Kaptchuk [7]), which Pattinson and Wanigasekera [1] rightly note may not be balanced between placebo-controlled trial arms. Pertinently, we do not wish to devalue “traditional” randomised controlled trials. However, evidence from such trials should be considered alongside other types of research methods, such as “pragmatic” research that more closely reflects routine clinical care and “additively” evaluates the incorporation of a new treatment to patients’ existing care, carefully monitoring all aspects of the new treatment (e.g. interaction with healthcare, subsequent self-management) in order to understand the likely mechanisms by which treatment benefits are conferred.

Many medical professionals think of a “placebo” as an inert pill but, as Turner [4] noted, a comparison with “placebo” in a trial is merely a comparison of one group with another – and the “placebo pill” is merely a symbolic object involved in this process. This process definition is in line with modern accounts of clinical placebos focussed on context, meaning and embodiment. We also agree with the point made by Pattinson and Wanigasekera [1] that “placebo” is often used disparagingly to refer to treatments that do not work; such a position risks overlooking the benefits that are conferred independently to identified physiological improvements. This is particularly relevant for nonpharmacological treatments, such as breathing retraining exercises, mindfulness-based treatments or cognitive behavioural therapy, which are increasingly used as effective patient treatments in respiratory disease but demonstrate no measurable effect on physiological outcomes. By defining placebos as “inert” substances we are in danger of classifying such complementary treatments as ineffective, when in fact they may be cost-effective adjunct treatments that offer tangible patient benefits.

We welcome the call for “open-label” placebo research. However, a considered and cautious approach should be taken, insofar as such treatment may merely demonstrate the presence of broad psychological and behavioural treatment effects without determining which of these can be targeted (and therefore impacted by well-designed nonpharmacological interventions). Moreover, as Currow et al. [8] note (supported by modern contextual accounts of the placebo phenomenon [9]), although the results of small-scale open-label placebo trials may reflect genuine therapeutic benefit, they may also just be an artefact of the experimental situation, meaning it is unclear how such a treatment response can be harnessed.

These effects of open-label placebos are not caused by the “inert” pill itself, but by the construction and exploitation of a whole treatment process. Given that many existing nonpharmacological interventions can be conceived of as already established whole treatment processes (without the negative connotations of placebos) we advocate that the best way to therapeutically employ beneficial treatment responses may be to conduct careful research on these nonpharmacological interventions.

Footnotes

  • Conflict of interest: B Ainsworth has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: D. Hardman has nothing to disclose.

  • Conflict of interest: M. Thomas has received speaker's honoraria for speaking at sponsored meetings or satellite symposia at conferences from the following companies marketing respiratory and allergy products: GSK and Novartis; has received honoraria for attending advisory panels with: Boehringer Ingelhiem, GSK and Novartis; is a recent a member of the BTS SIGN asthma guideline steering group and the NICE asthma diagnosis and monitoring guideline development group.

  • Received January 22, 2019.
  • Accepted February 23, 2019.
  • Copyright ©ERS 2019
https://www.ersjournals.com/user-licence

References

  1. ↵
    1. Pattinson K,
    2. Wanigasekera V
    . Sertraline or placebo in chronic breathlessness? Lessons from placebo research. Eur Respir J 2019; 53: 1802225.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Currow DC,
    2. Ekström M,
    3. Louw S, et al.
    Sertraline in symptomatic chronic breathlessness: a double blind, randomised trial. Eur Respir J 2019; 53: 1801270.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Similowski T,
    2. Serresse L
    . Lessons from negative dyspnoea studies: arguments for the multidimensional evaluation of multidirectional therapeutic approaches. Eur Respir J 2019; 53: 1802471.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Turner A
    . “Placebos” and the logic of placebo comparison. Biology & Philosophy 2012; 27: 419–432.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Teeter JG,
    2. Bleecker ER
    . Relationship between airway obstruction and respiratory symptoms in adult asthmatics. Chest 1998; 113: 272–277.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. ↵
    1. Janssens T,
    2. Verleden G,
    3. De Peuter S, et al.
    Inaccurate perception of asthma symptoms: a cognitive–affective framework and implications for asthma treatment. Clin Psychol Rev 2009; 29: 317–327.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  7. ↵
    1. Ongaro G,
    2. Kaptchuk TJ
    . Symptom perception, placebo effects, and the Bayesian brain. Pain 2019; 160: 1–4.
    OpenUrl
  8. ↵
    1. Currow DC,
    2. Agar M,
    3. Ekström M
    . Sertraline or placebo in chronic breathlessness? Lessons from placebo research. Eur Respir J 2019; 53: 1802316.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Miller FG
    . Reining in the placebo effect. Perspect Biol Med 2018; 61: 335–348.
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top
View this article with LENS
Vol 53 Issue 4 Table of Contents
European Respiratory Journal: 53 (4)
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on European Respiratory Society .

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The importance of differentiating behavioural and psychological treatment effects from placebo in respiratory interventions
(Your Name) has sent you a message from European Respiratory Society
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the European Respiratory Society web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Print
Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Citation Tools
The importance of differentiating behavioural and psychological treatment effects from placebo in respiratory interventions
Ben Ainsworth, Doug Hardman, Mike Thomas
European Respiratory Journal Apr 2019, 53 (4) 1900156; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00156-2019

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero

Share
The importance of differentiating behavioural and psychological treatment effects from placebo in respiratory interventions
Ben Ainsworth, Doug Hardman, Mike Thomas
European Respiratory Journal Apr 2019, 53 (4) 1900156; DOI: 10.1183/13993003.00156-2019
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Technorati logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Connotea logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
Full Text (PDF)

Jump To

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

More in this TOC Section

Agora

  • Fixed breathing protocols in multiple-breath washout testing in children
  • Bedaquiline and delamanid for the treatment of MDR-TB
  • Clump material within drainage chest tubes contains diagnostic information
Show more Agora

Correspondence

  • Fixed breathing protocols in multiple-breath washout testing in children
  • Fixed breathing protocols in multiple-breath washout testing in children
  • Connexins and the pulmonary vascular response to hypoxia
Show more Correspondence

Related Articles

Navigate

  • Home
  • Current issue
  • Archive

About the ERJ

  • Journal information
  • Editorial board
  • Reviewers
  • CME
  • Press
  • Permissions and reprints
  • Advertising

The European Respiratory Society

  • Society home
  • myERS
  • Privacy policy
  • Accessibility

ERS publications

  • European Respiratory Journal
  • ERJ Open Research
  • European Respiratory Review
  • Breathe
  • ERS books online
  • ERS Bookshop

Help

  • Feedback

For authors

  • Instructions for authors
  • Submit a manuscript
  • ERS author centre

For readers

  • Alerts
  • Subjects
  • Podcasts
  • RSS

Subscriptions

  • Accessing the ERS publications

Contact us

European Respiratory Society
442 Glossop Road
Sheffield S10 2PX
United Kingdom
Tel: +44 114 2672860
Email: journals@ersnet.org

ISSN

Print ISSN:  0903-1936
Online ISSN: 1399-3003

Copyright © 2021 by the European Respiratory Society