Elsevier

Manual Therapy

Volume 24, August 2016, Pages 65-74
Manual Therapy

Masterclass
Enhance placebo, avoid nocebo: How contextual factors affect physiotherapy outcomes

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.math.2016.04.006Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Placebo and nocebo represent complex and distinct psychoneurobiological phenomena.

  • The psychosocial context around the patient can influence the therapeutic outcome.

  • Every healthcare intervention is formed by a therapy specific and a context related component.

  • The contextual elements interact modulating the specific effect of the therapy.

  • To achieve the best therapeutic outcome it is useful to boost the context, the therapeutic relationship, the healing ritual.

Abstract

Introduction

Placebo and nocebo represent complex and distinct psychoneurobiological phenomena in which behavioural and neurophysiological modifications occur together with the application of a treatment. Despite a better understanding of this topic in the medical field, little is known about their role in physiotherapy.

Purpose

The aim of this review is: a) to elucidate the neurobiology behind placebo and nocebo effects, b) to describe the role of the contextual factors as modulators of the clinical outcomes in rehabilitation and c) to provide clinical and research guidelines on their uses.

Implications

The physiotherapist's features, the patient's features, the patient–physiotherapist relationship, the characteristics of the treatment and the overall healthcare setting are all contextual factors influencing clinical outcomes. Since every physiotherapy treatment determines a specific and a contextual effect, physiotherapists should manage the contextual factors as a boosting element of any manual therapy to improve placebo effects and avoid detrimental nocebo effects.

Introduction

Every day physiotherapists (PTs) use different tools, such as manual techniques and exercises, to achieve their main professional goals: the improvement of pain, disability and patient's self-perceived health condition. The management of placebo and avoidance of nocebo responses have recently been suggested as promising additional clinical strategies (Gay and Bishop, 2014), generating a wide debate in manual therapy research (Benz and Flynn, 2013, Ingram et al., 2013, Kamper and Williams, 2013).

Placebo and nocebo represent complex and distinct psychoneurobiological phenomena in which behavioural and neurophysiological modifications occur following application of a treatment. The placebo (Latin “I shall please”) is created by the positive psychosocial context that is capable of influencing the patient's brain (Benedetti, 2013). Instead, the nocebo (Latin “I shall harm”) is the result of the negative ritual and therapeutic act on the patient's mind and body (Benedetti et al., 2007, Colloca and Benedetti, 2007, Colloca and Miller, 2011c).

From a psychobiological perspective (Fig. 1), conscious expectation and the unconscious classical conditioning, reward-learning, observational and social learning, modulation of anxiety, desire, motivation, memory and prior experience, somatic focus, personality traits and genetics work as facilitators of placebo or nocebo (Benedetti et al., 2011, Colloca and Miller, 2011b, Colloca, 2014) and modulate different responses across several diseases, illnesses, and treatment methods (Benedetti, 2008, Enck et al., 2013, Schedlowski et al., 2015). Although some attempts to identify (Michener et al., 2013) and to measure (Michener et al., 2015) the placebo response induced by sham techniques have been reported, to date the role of placebo response seems to be poorly recognized and applied by PTs in the clinical setting (Bialosky et al., 2011) and nocebo is still scarcely considered as a possible variable negatively influencing rehabilitation outcome. Agreeing that the conscious reinforcement of placebo strategies could represent an additional opportunity for every PT to improve their clinical outcomes, this masterclass aims to:

  • a)

    Synthesize the neurobiological mechanisms underlying the placebo and nocebo responses;

  • b)

    Describe the contextual factors as modulators of clinical outcomes in musculoskeletal rehabilitation;

  • c)

    Provide guidance for the clinical implementation of placebo enhancement and/or nocebo avoidance;

  • d)

    Identify possible new lines of investigation in manual therapy research.

Section snippets

The neurobiological mechanisms behind placebo and nocebo responses

Pain and motor performance are the most frequently used models to describe the neural network involved during the placebo and nocebo responses (Tracey, 2010, Carlino et al., 2011, Colloca et al., 2013, Colagiuri et al., 2015).

The contextual factors optimize the rehabilitation outcomes

The psychosocial context and the therapeutic ritual around the patient can also influence the patient's brain activity and the therapeutic outcome such as satisfaction and perceived effect (Colloca and Benedetti, 2005, Benedetti, 2013, Carlino et al., 2014a). As reported in Fig. 3, the physiotherapist's and patient's features, the patient–physiotherapist relationship, the characteristics of the treatment and the overall healthcare setting are the most relevant categories of contextual factors

Implications for clinicians: maximise placebo, minimize nocebo

In therapeutic settings, placebo and nocebo effects are commonly detected. Various systematic reviews have observed placebo when continuous subjective measures of disease are adopted, but not when binary subjective or objective measures are applied (Hróbjartsson and Gøtzsche, 2001, Hróbjartsson and Gøtzsche, 2004, Hróbjartsson and Gøtzsche, 2010). This advocates that placebo does not influence the disease but affects the illness as subjective perceptions of the patient experience (Miller and

Implications for research: design placebo and nocebo trials

The creation of an adequate trial design remains a challenge in placebo and nocebo research (Enck et al., 2011, Vase et al., 2015). Researchers should be aware that the management of the contextual factors is linked to their goals. Limiting the therapeutic relationship and the ritual around the treatment favours immersion of the specific effect of the therapy (Haas et al., 2010, Haas et al., 2014, Salsbury et al., 2014). In contrast, the administration of an active therapy increases the

Conclusion

The difference in clinical success between two different PTs, both practicing with reference to the scientific evidence and application of the clinical guidelines lies in the different level of implementation of the “art” component of the profession. This is probably mostly due to behaviours that have relevant effects on the clinical outcome through placebo or nocebo phenomenon. The possibility of adopting knowledgeable, expert and ethical strategies to enhance placebo and avoid nocebo offers a

Acknowledgements

The authors want to thank Luana Colloca, Elisa Carlino and Alberto Gallace for their valuable advice during the advancement of this manuscript.

References (143)

  • Z.D. Blasi et al.

    Influence of context effects on health outcomes: a systematic review

    Lancet

    (2001)
  • B. Colagiuri et al.

    The placebo effect: from concepts to genes

    Neuroscience

    (2015)
  • L. Colloca et al.

    How prior experience shapes placebo analgesia

    Pain

    (2006)
  • L. Colloca et al.

    Placebo analgesia: psychological and neurobiological mechanisms

    Pain

    (2013)
  • L. Colloca et al.

    Overt versus covert treatment for pain, anxiety, and Parkinson's disease

    Lancet Neurol

    (2004)
  • P.J. Daffada et al.

    The impact of cortical remapping interventions on pain and disability in chronic low back pain: a systematic review

    Physiotherapy

    (2015)
  • M. Diers et al.

    Site-specific visual feedback reduces pain perception

    Pain

    (2013)
  • R. Feldman

    Oxytocin and social affiliation in humans

    Horm Behav

    (2012)
  • T. Field

    Massage therapy research review

    Complement Ther Clin Pract

    (2014)
  • D.G. Finniss et al.

    Mechanisms of the placebo response and their impact on clinical trials and clinical practice

    Pain

    (2005)
  • D.G. Finniss et al.

    Biological, clinical, and ethical advances of placebo effects

    Lancet

    (2010)
  • E. Frisaldi et al.

    Characterization of the thalamic-subthalamic circuit involved in the placebo response through single-neuron recording in Parkinson patients

    Cortex J Devoted Study Nerv Syst Behav

    (2014)
  • A. Gallace et al.

    The science of interpersonal touch: an overview

    Neurosci Biobehav Rev

    (2010)
  • M. Haas et al.

    A preliminary path analysis of expectancy and patient-provider encounter in an open-label randomized controlled trial of spinal manipulation for cervicogenic headache

    J Manip Physiol Ther

    (2010)
  • S.G. Henry et al.

    Association between nonverbal communication during clinical interactions and outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

    Patient Educ Couns

    (2012)
  • K. Hopayian et al.

    A systematic review of low back pain and sciatica patients' expectations and experiences of health care

    Spine J Off J North Am Spine Soc

    (2014)
  • I. Josephson et al.

    Evaluative language in physiotherapy practice: how does it contribute to the therapeutic relationship?

    Soc Sci Med

    (2015)
  • R. Klinger et al.

    Placebo analgesia: clinical applications

    Pain

    (2014)
  • M. Lewis et al.

    Measuring practitioner/therapist effects in randomised trials of low back pain and neck pain interventions in primary care settings

    Eur J Pain

    (2010)
  • M.L. Ludvigsson et al.

    Evaluation of physiotherapists as primary assessors of patients with musculoskeletal disorders seeking primary health care

    Physiotherapy

    (2012)
  • S. Malenbaum et al.

    Pain in its environmental context: implications for designing environments to enhance pain control

    Pain

    (2008)
  • L.A. Michener et al.

    Development of a sham comparator for thoracic spinal manipulative therapy for use with shoulder disorders

    Man Ther

    (2013)
  • L.A. Michener et al.

    Validation of a sham comparator for thoracic spinal manipulation in patients with shoulder pain

    Man Ther

    (2015)
  • M. Amanzio et al.

    Activation likelihood estimation meta-analysis of brain correlates of placebo analgesia in human experimental pain

    Hum Brain Mapp

    (2013)
  • A. Autret et al.

    Placebo and other psychological interactions in headache treatment

    J Headache Pain

    (2012)
  • B. Barrett et al.

    Placebo, meaning, and health

    Perspect Biol Med

    (2006)
  • C.J. Barron et al.

    Patient expectations of physiotherapy: definitions, concepts, and theories

    Physiother Theory Pract

    (2007)
  • C.J. Beedie

    All in the mind? Pain, placebo effect, and ergogenic effect of caffeine in sports performance

    Open Access J Sports Med

    (2010)
  • C.J. Beedie et al.

    The placebo effect in sports performance: a brief review

    Sports Med

    (2009)
  • F. Benedetti

    How the doctor's words affect the patient's brain

    Eval Health Prof

    (2002)
  • F. Benedetti

    Mechanisms of placebo and placebo-related effects across diseases and treatments

    Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol

    (2008)
  • F. Benedetti

    Placebo and the new physiology of the doctor-patient relationship

    Physiol Rev

    (2013)
  • F. Benedetti et al.

    How placebos change the patient's brain

    Neuropsychopharmacol Off Publ Am Coll Neuropsychopharmacol

    (2011)
  • F. Benedetti et al.

    Teaching neurons to respond to placebos

    J Physiol

    (2016 Jan 28)
  • F. Benedetti et al.

    Neurobiological mechanisms of the placebo effect

    J Neurosci Off J Soc Neurosci

    (2005)
  • L.N. Benz et al.

    Placebo, nocebo, and expectations: leveraging positive outcomes

    J Orthop Sports Phys Ther

    (2013)
  • J.E. Bialosky et al.

    Individual expectation: an overlooked, but pertinent, factor in the treatment of individuals experiencing musculoskeletal pain

    Phys Ther

    (2010)
  • J.E. Bialosky et al.

    Placebo response to manual therapy: something out of nothing?

    J Man Manip Ther

    (2011)
  • F.L. Bishop et al.

    Context effects and behaviour change techniques in randomised trials: a systematic review using the example of trials to increase adherence to physical activity in musculoskeletal pain

    Psychol Health

    (2015)
  • F.L. Bishop et al.

    Patient preferences for technical skills versus interpersonal skills in chiropractors and physiotherapists treating low back pain

    Fam Pract

    (2013)
  • Cited by (138)

    • The role of touch in osteopathic clinical encounters – A scoping review

      2024, International Journal of Osteopathic Medicine
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text