Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “PLACEBOS”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 973 records · Page 54Linked to original sources
PubMed2001

Transdermal nicotine and haloperidol in Tourette's disorder: a double-blind placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical animal and open-trial clinical trials using nicotine gum and the transdermal nicotine patch found that treatment with nicotine potentiates the effects of neuroleptics in reducing the dyskinetic symptoms of Tourette's disorder. We sought to verify and expand these findings in a prospective double-blind placebo-controlled trial. METHOD: Seventy patients with DSM-IV Tourette's disorder were treated with either transdermal nicotine (7 mg/24 hours) or placebo patches in a 33-day, randomized, double-blind study. Each patient received an individually based optimal dose of haloperidol for at least 2 weeks prior to random assignment to nicotine or placebo treatment. A new patch was worn each day for the first 5 days. On the sixth day, the dose of haloperidol was reduced by 50%. Daily patch applications were then continued for an additional 2 weeks (through day 19), at which time the patch was discontinued, but the 50% dose of haloperidol was continued for an additional 2 weeks (through day 33). Clinical and safety assessments were made at each visit. RESULTS: Patients who completed all 19 days of nicotine (N = 27) or placebo (N = 29) patch treatment were used in efficacy analyses. As documented by the Clinician- and Parent-rated Global Improvement scales, transdermal nicotine was superior to placebo in reducing the symptoms of Tourette's disorder. The Yale Global Tic Severity Scale was less sensitive in detecting a placebo/drug difference than were the global improvement scores, suggesting that some of the improvement may not have been related to treatment-related changes in tic severity, but to the emotional and behavioral symptoms. The side effects of nausea and vomiting were significantly more common in the nicotine group (71% [N = 25] and 40% [N = 14]) than in the placebo group (17% [N = 6] and 9% [N = 3]) (nausea, p = .0001; vomiting, p = .004). CONCLUSION: Transdermal nicotine was superior to placebo in reducing behavioral symptoms when patients were receiving an optimal dose of haloperidol, when the dose of haloperidol was reduced by 50%, and when the patch had been discontinued for 2 weeks. These findings confirm earlier open-label findings and suggest that combining nicotinic receptor modulation and neuroleptics could be a therapeutic option for the treatment of Tourette's disorder. While side effects limit chronic use of nicotine, it may be useful on a p.r.n. basis. Further clinical research is warranted to investigate the use of novel nicotinic receptor modulating agents with improved safety profiles over nicotine.

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMed2002

A randomized, double-blind, fixed-dose comparison of paroxetine and placebo in the treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder.

BACKGROUND: This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was carried out to determine the effectiveness and safety of various daily dosages of paroxetine for the treatment of generalized social anxiety disorder. METHOD: A 1-week, single-blind, placebo run-in was followed by 12 weeks of double-blind treatment. 384 eligible patients meeting DSM-IV criteria for social anxiety disorder were randomly assigned to receive paroxetine, 20 (N = 97), 40 (N = 95), or 60 mg (N = 97), or placebo (N = 95) once daily in a 1:1:1:1 ratio. Primary efficacy variables included mean change from baseline in the Liebowitz Social Anxiety Scale (LSAS) total score and proportion of patients exhibiting a therapeutic response (defined as a Clinical Global Impressions-Global Improvement scale [CGI-1] score of 1 or 2). RESULTS: In the last-observation-carried-forward analyses, patients treated with paroxetine, 20 mg/day, had significantly greater improvement on mean LSAS total scores compared with those receiving placebo (p < .001), while the incidence of responders, based on the CGI-I rating, was significantly greater with paroxetine, 40 mg/day, than with placebo (p = .012). Patients treated with paroxetine, 20 and 60 mg, also had significantly better responses on the social item of the Sheehan Disability Scale than did patients treated with placebo (p < .019). The completer analyses showed a significant difference between the placebo group and the 20-mg and 40-mg paroxetine groups on LSAS total score and rate of response (p < or = .006). There were no serious adverse experiences attributed to paroxetine treatment. CONCLUSION: Paroxetine, 20 mg/day, is an effective and safe treatment for patients with generalized social anxiety disorder and significantly improves social anxiety, avoidance of social interactions, social disability, and overall clinical condition. Further data analyses are needed to determine whether more specific guidelines for paroxetine dosage escalation in social anxiety disorder can be drawn.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2002

Efficacy and safety of aripiprazole and haloperidol versus placebo in patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.

BACKGROUND: Aripiprazole is an investigational agent for treating schizophrenia that has a novel pharmacologic profile. The present study investigated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of aripiprazole and haloperidol compared with placebo. METHOD: A 4-week, double-blind, randomized study, conducted at 36 U.S. centers between July 1997 and June 1998, compared aripiprazole (15 mg/day, 30 mg/day) to placebo, with haloperidol (10 mg/day) as an active control. Fixed doses of each agent were administered from day 1 throughout the study. A total of 414 patients with a primary DSM-IV diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were randomized. Efficacy measures included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total, PANSS positive, PANSS negative, PANSS-derived Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) core, Clinical Global Impressions (CGI)-Severity of Illness, and mean CGI-Improvement scores. Safety and tolerability evaluations included extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), weight gain, serum prolactin level, and QTc interval. RESULTS: Both doses of aripiprazole and haloperidol, 10 mg, produced statistically significant (p < or = .05) improvements from baseline in PANSS total, PANSS positive, PANSS-derived BPRS core, and CGI-Severity scores and significantly lower CGI-Improvement scores at endpoint, compared with placebo. Aripiprazole, 15 mg, and haloperidol, 10 mg, significantly improved PANSS negative score compared with placebo. Both aripiprazole doses and haloperidol separated from placebo for PANSS total scores at week 2. Unlike haloperidol, aripiprazole was not associated with significant EPS or prolactin elevation at endpoint compared with placebo. There were no statistically significant differences in mean changes in body weight across the treatment groups versus placebo, and no patients receiving aripiprazole experienced clinically significant increases in QTc interval. CONCLUSION: Aripiprazole, effective against positive and negative symptoms, is a safe and well-tolerated potential treatment for schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2003

Evaluating the efficacy of habit reversal: comparison with a placebo control.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of habit reversal with a placebo control as a treatment for chronic nail biting in adults. METHOD: Thirty adults with a chronic nail-biting problem (occurring > or = 5 times/day nearly every day for > or = 4 weeks and causing physical damage or social impairment) were randomly assigned to a placebo control or habit reversal group. Five participants withdrew from the study prior to the completion of treatment. The remaining individuals in both groups received a total of 2 hours of treatment over 3 sessions. Individuals in the habit reversal group (N = 13) received the components of awareness training, competing response training, and social support. Individuals in the placebo control group (N = 12) simply discussed their nail biting. At pretreatment, posttreatment, and a 5-month follow-up, nail length was measured, photographs were taken of the damaged nails and later rated by independent observers, and data on participant depression, anxiety, and self-esteem were obtained. Treatment compliance and acceptability data were collected at posttreatment only. RESULTS: Results showed that habit reversal produced a greater increase in nail length at posttreatment and follow-up when compared with the placebo. Data from the independent raters confirmed these findings. Habit reversal was also viewed as a more acceptable intervention by the participants. At posttreatment, the habit reversal group had increased their nail length by 22% from pretreatment compared with a 3% increase for the placebo group. At follow-up, the habit reversal group maintained a 19% increase in nail length from pretreatment compared with a 0% increase for the placebo group. CONCLUSION: Findings from this study suggest habit reversal is more effective than a placebo control and should be considered a well-established intervention for body-focused repetitive behaviors.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Escitalopram in the treatment of panic disorder: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Escitalopram, the therapeutically active isomer of the racemic selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressant citalopram, has shown significant anxiolytic effects in placebo-controlled clinical trials of social anxiety disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, and anxiety symptoms associated with major depression. This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of escitalopram in outpatients diagnosed with panic disorder. METHOD: Male and female outpatients between 18 and 80 years of age meeting DSM-IV criteria for panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, were randomly assigned to 10 weeks of double-blind treatment with escitalopram, citalopram, or placebo in a study conducted from September 1999 to July 2001. The primary measure of efficacy was panic attack frequency at week 10 relative to baseline, as assessed by the Modified Sheehan Panic and Anticipatory Anxiety Scale. RESULTS: A total of 366 subjects (128 escitalopram patients, 119 citalopram patients, and 119 placebo patients) received at least 1 dose of double-blind treatment. The frequency of panic attacks was statistically significantly improved (p =.04), and the increase in percentage of patients with zero panic attacks reached borderline significance (p =.051), in the escitalopram-treated group relative to the placebo-treated group. Both escitalopram and citalopram statistically significantly reduced panic disorder symptoms and severity versus placebo at endpoint (p </=.05), as measured by the Panic and Agoraphobia Scale total score, the Clinical Global Impressions scale, the Patient Global Evaluation, and the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire. Treatment with escitalopram was safe and well tolerated, with a similar incidence of the most common adverse events for the escitalopram and placebo groups. The rate of discontinuation for adverse events was 6.3% for escitalopram, 8.4% for citalopram, and 7.6% for placebo. CONCLUSION: Escitalopram is efficacious, safe, and well tolerated in the treatment of panic disorder.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2004

A 3-month, randomized, placebo-controlled, neuroleptic discontinuation study in 100 people with dementia: the neuropsychiatric inventory median cutoff is a predictor of clinical outcome.

BACKGROUND: Although few placebo-controlled neuroleptic discontinuation studies have been conducted in people with dementia, such studies are essential to inform key clinical decisions. METHOD: A 3-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled, neuroleptic discontinuation study (June 2000 to June 2002) was completed in 100 care-facility residents with probable or possible Alzheimer's disease (according to National Institute of Neurological and Communicative Diseases and Stroke/Alzheimer's Disease and Related Disorders Association criteria) who had no severe behavioral disturbances and had been taking neuroleptics for longer than 3 months. The Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) was used to measure changes in behavioral and psychiatric symptoms. Quality of life was evaluated using Dementia Care Mapping. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients completed the 1-month assessment (36 placebo, 46 active). The number of participants withdrawing overall (N = 14 [30%] placebo, N = 14 [26%] active treatment) and because of exacerbation of behavioral symptoms (N = 6 [13%] placebo, N = 5 [9%] active treatment) was similar in the neuroleptic- and placebo-treated patients. As hypothesized, patients with baseline NPI scores at or below the median (< or = 14) had a particularly good outcome, with a significantly greater reduction of agitation in the patients receiving placebo (Mann-Whitney U test, z = 2.4, p =.018), while patients with higher baseline NPI scores were significantly more likely to develop marked behavioral problems if discontinued from neuroleptics (chi(2) = 6.8, p =.009). There was no overall difference in the change of quality of life parameters between groups. DISCUSSION: A standardized evaluation with an instrument such as the NPI may be a clinical indicator of which people with dementia are likely to benefit from discontinuation of neuroleptic treatment.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Modafinil film-coated tablets in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose study followed by abrupt discontinuation.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this fixed-dose study was to determine the efficacy and safety of a new formulation of modafinil (modafinil film-coated tablets) in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). In addition, the effect of abrupt discontinuation of modafinil was evaluated in a 2-week observation period. METHOD: Patients aged 6 to 17 years with DSM-IV-TR-defined ADHD were randomly assigned to 7 weeks of double-blind treatment with modafinil or placebo in a 2:1 ratio, followed by abrupt discontinuation of modafinil and a 2-week, double-blind observation period in which 46% of patients receiving modafinil were switched to placebo without tapering and half continued to receive modafinil. Study drug was administered once daily and titrated over the first 7 to 9 days to daily doses of 340 mg for patients < 30 kg or 425 mg for patients > or = 30 kg. Assessment instruments included the Attention-Deficit/ Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV (ADHD-RS-IV) School and Home Versions and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale (CGI-I). The study was conducted from November 2003 to June 2004. RESULTS: A total of 190 patients were randomly assigned to receive modafinil (340 mg, N = 44; 425 mg, N = 82) or placebo (N = 64). 189 patients were evaluated for safety. Modafinil significantly improved symptoms of ADHD as shown by reductions in ADHD-RS-IV School Version total scores compared with placebo at all visits (p < or = .009), including the final visit of the double-blind phase (p < .0001). With modafinil, ADHD-RS-IV School Version mean total scores changed from 37.8 at baseline to 29.3 at week 1 and 20.7 at final visit; corresponding placebo values were 36.6, 32.8, and 28.4, respectively; effect size at final visit was 0.76 (95% CI = 0.63 to 0.88). Total scores on the ADHD-RS-IV Home Version were also significantly reduced at all visits (p < or = .022) and final visit (p = .001) in patients receiving modafinil compared with those receiving placebo. Significantly higher proportions of patients receiving modafinil were rated "much improved" or "very much improved" in overall clinical condition (CGI-I) at all visits compared with patients receiving placebo (p < .001). No withdrawal symptoms were observed when modafinil was abruptly discontinued at the beginning of the final 2-week observation period. Modafinil was generally well tolerated. Insomnia, headache, and decreased appetite were the most commonly reported adverse events. Sixty-three percent of patients who received modafinil completed the study; 13% discontinued because of lack of efficacy; 10%, because of adverse events; and 13%, for other reasons (e.g., consent withdrawn, lost to follow-up). CONCLUSION: Modafinil significantly improved symptoms of ADHD both at school and at home and was well tolerated by children and adolescents. Abrupt discontinuation of modafinil was not associated with symptoms of withdrawal or with rebound of symptoms of ADHD.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

A double-blind, multicenter, parallel-group study of paroxetine, desipramine, or placebo in breast cancer patients (stages I, II, III, and IV) with major depression.

OBJECTIVE: This study compared the efficacy and safety of paroxetine and desipramine with those of placebo in the treatment of depressive disorders in adult women with breast cancer, stages I-IV. METHOD: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 35 female outpatients with breast cancer and DSM-III-R major depression or adjustment disorder with depressed mood were randomly assigned to treatment with paroxetine (N=13), desipramine (N=11), or placebo (N=11) for 6 weeks. Primary efficacy was assessed by change from baseline in score on the 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), and the secondary outcome measure was change from baseline in the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S) score. RESULTS: Mean changes in the total HAM-D and CGI-S scores from baseline to 6-week endpoint for the paroxetine and desipramine groups were not significantly different than those for the placebo-treated group. An unusually high rate of response (defined as >or=50% improvement in the HAM-D score) in the placebo group was observed (55% [N=6]); adverse events precipitated patient discontinuation in the active treatment groups (9% [N=1] for desipramine, 15% [N=2] for paroxetine) similar to that in the placebo-treated patients (18% [N=2]). Improvement on symptom dimensions within the HAM-D and Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (depressive, anxiety, cognitive, neurovegetative, or somatic) was also similar between groups. CONCLUSION: The small number of women in this study most likely contributed to the lack of observed differences in efficacy observed during the 6 weeks of treatment. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials of adequate power seeking to determine efficacy of antidepressants in the United States for the treatment of women with breast cancer and comorbid depression remain of paramount importance.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

A comparison of once-daily and divided doses of modafinil in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: a randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of several modafinil dosing regimens in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) to determine whether modafinil can be given once daily in pediatric ADHD. METHOD: Children and adolescents (age range, 6-13 years) (N = 248) with DSM-IV-defined ADHD were enrolled in a 4-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, conducted February-May 2002. The group was assigned to receive oral (100-mg tablets) modafinil 300 mg once daily (300 mg in the morning followed by placebo at midday), modafinil 300 mg as a divided dose (100/200 mg or 200/100 mg), or matching placebo. In children weighing > or = 30 kg, a higher dose of 400 mg (200/200 mg) was evaluated. Efficacy measures included the teacher-rated School Version and clinician-rated Home Version of the ADHD Rating Scale-IV and the parent-completed Conners' ADHD/DSM-IV Scales. RESULTS: 223 children completed the study. Those who received modafinil 300 mg once daily showed a significantly greater improvement (change from baseline) than those who received placebo in symptoms of ADHD across all rating scales and subscales (all p < .05). Divided 300-mg doses of modafinil provided some significant but inconsistent improvements in ADHD symptoms. In children weighing > or = 30 kg, modafinil 400 mg (200/200 mg) was significantly superior to placebo on clinician- and parent-completed scales (all p < .05). Insomnia was the only adverse event to occur with significantly greater frequency in a modafinil group (200/100) than in the placebo group (14% vs. 2%) (p = .03). CONCLUSION: Modafinil significantly improved ADHD symptoms in children. Once-daily dosing (300 mg) provided the most consistent improvement in symptoms. All dosing regimens of modafinil were well tolerated.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Bupropion extended release compared with escitalopram: effects on sexual functioning and antidepressant efficacy in 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects on sexual functioning and the antidepressant efficacy of once-daily bupropion extended release (XL) and escitalopram in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD: Adult outpatients with moderate to severe DSM-IV-defined MDD and normal sexual functioning were randomly assigned to receive bupropion XL (300-450 mg/day; N = 276), escitalopram (10-20 mg/day; N = 281), or placebo (N = 273) for up to 8 weeks in 2 identically designed, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group studies (study 1 conducted from February 6, 2003, to June 10, 2004; study 2 conducted from January 21, 2003, to June 15, 2004). Data were analyzed prospectively for each study individually, and pooled data were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: In both the individual studies and the pooled dataset, the incidence of orgasm dysfunction at week 8 (primary endpoint) and the incidence of worsened sexual functioning at the end of the treatment period were statistically significantly lower with bupropion XL than with escitalopram (p < .05), not statistically different between bupropion XL and placebo (p > or = .067), and statistically significantly higher with escitalopram than with placebo (p < or = .001). The percentages of patients with orgasm dysfunction at week 8 in study 1, study 2, and the pooled dataset, respectively, were 13%, 16%, and 15% with bupropion XL; 32%, 29%, and 30% with escitalopram; and 11%, 8%, and 9% with placebo. The respective percentages of patients with worsened sexual functioning at the end of the treatment period were 18%, 22%, and 20% with bupropion XL; 37%, 34%, and 36% with escitalopram; and 14%, 16%, and 15% with placebo. Mean changes in Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire scores for all domains at week 8 were statistically significantly worse for escitalopram compared with bupropion XL (p < or = .05). Separation from placebo could not be established at a statistical .05 level for bupropion on 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D-17) total score. However, escitalopram showed statistical superiority to placebo on HAM-D-17 total score in one of the 2 studies and in the pooled data. Bupropion XL did not statistically differ from escitalopram with respect to mean change in HAM-D-17 total score, HAM-D-17 response or remission rates, percentage of patients much or very much improved on Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale scores, or mean changes in the Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) scale total score or Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale score at week 8. CONCLUSIONS: Bupropion XL had a sexual tolerability profile significantly better than that of escitalopram with similar HAM-D-17 remission rates and HAD total scores in patients with MDD.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Treatment of vasomotor symptoms of menopause with black cohosh, multibotanicals, soy, hormone therapy, or placebo: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Herbal supplements are widely used for vasomotor symptoms. OBJECTIVE: To test the efficacy of 3 herbal regimens and hormone therapy for relief of vasomotor symptoms compared with placebo. DESIGN: 1-year randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted from May 2001 to September 2004. SETTING: Group Health, Washington State. PARTICIPANTS: 351 women age 45 to 55 years with 2 or more vasomotor symptoms per day; 52% of the women were in menopausal transition and 48% were postmenopausal. MEASUREMENTS: Rate and intensity of vasomotor symptoms (1 = mild to 3 = severe), and Wiklund Vasomotor Symptom Subscale. INTERVENTIONS: 1) Black cohosh, 160 mg daily; 2) multibotanical with black cohosh, 200 mg daily, and 9 other ingredients; 3) multibotanical plus dietary soy counseling; 4) conjugated equine estrogen, 0.625 mg daily, with or without medroxyprogesterone acetate, 2.5 mg daily; or 5) placebo. RESULTS: Vasomotor symptoms per day, symptom intensity, Wiklund Vasomotor Symptom Subscale score did not differ between the herbal interventions and placebo at 3, 6, or 12 months or for the average over all the follow-up time points (P > 0.05 for all comparisons) with 1 exception: At 12 months, symptom intensity was significantly worse with the multibotanical plus soy intervention than with placebo (P = 0.016). The difference in vasomotor symptoms per day between placebo and any of the herbal treatments at any time point was less than 1 symptom per day; for the average over all the follow-up time points, the difference was less than 0.55 symptom per day. The difference for hormone therapy versus placebo was -4.06 vasomotor symptoms per day for the average over all the follow-up time points (95% CI, -5.93 to -2.19 symptoms per day; P < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: The trial did not simulate the whole-person approach used by naturopathic physicians. Differences between treatment groups smaller than 1.5 Vasomotor symptoms per day cannot be ruled out. CONCLUSION: Black cohosh used in isolation, or as part of a multibotanical regimen, shows little potential as an important therapy for relief of vasomotor symptoms. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00169299.

Cimicifuga↗
PubMed1979

Knowledge and use of placebos by house officers and nurses.

Sixty house officers and 39 registered nurses in a university teaching hospital were surveyed to ascertain their knowledge of placebo action and their patterns of placebo use. The majority of physicians and nurses greatly underestimated the percentage of patients who experience pain relief when given placebo. Placebos typically were given to disliked patients who were suspected of exaggerating their pain or had failed to respond to usual medical regimens, or both. Positive responses to placebo medication were then interpreted by the physicians as evidence that the pain had no physiologic basis. Many studies have shown that overdemanding and complaining patients are, if anything, less likely to respond to placebo than patients well liked by the hospital staff. Nevertheless the results of our survey suggest that this is precisely the type of patient "at risk" for placebo treatment.

Adult↗
PubMed1982

The lie that heals: the ethics of giving placebos.

The 170-year-long debate in the medical literature about the ethics of prescribing placebos in medical therapeutics needs to be reevaluated in light of recent placebo research and improved understanding of the placebo effect as an integral part of the doctor-patient relationship. It has traditionally been assumed that deception is an indispensible component of successful placebo use. Therefore, placebos have been attacked because they are deceptive, and defended on the grounds that the deception is illusory or that the beneficent intentions of the physician justify the deception. However, a proper understanding of the placebo effect shows that deception need play no essential role in eliciting this powerful therapeutic modality; physicians can see nondeceptive means to promote a positive placebo response in their patients.

Attitude↗
PubMed2001

[Placebo effect in research related to surgery and technical procedures].

BACKGROUND: Development of new technology has led to the introduction of many new high-tech surgical treatment modalities. It has been claimed that the use of high-tech medicine is a potent inductor of placebo effect; in fact, many new treatment modalities have been established before they have been evaluated in placebo-controlled trials. However, there are several ways to minimize the confounding effects of placebo in surgical trials. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a review based on a thoroughly performed search on Medline of Norwegian and English language publications published up until August 2000. RESULTS: Several studies have demonstrated that surgical treatment induces significant placebo effect. To minimize the confounding effects of placebo in trials evaluating new surgical modalities, it is important to use adequate blinding, neutral patient information, objective end-points, and correction for estimated placebo effects. The use of placebo surgery has been a source of lively controversy; many consider it ethically unacceptable.

Clinical Trials as Topic↗
PubMed2002

[The placebo effect--a biochemical basis for a psychosomatic phenomenon].

We review the research over the past decade on the subject of the Placebo Neurochemical mechanism, and it's random presence in the clinic. Our goal is to present the scientific basis of the placebo, and to arouse the awareness of physicians and scientists to the crucial role of placebo in medicine and pharmacological research. The modeling of rationality in modern times displaced the placebo issue to the sidelines of consensus, and it was only around 1950 that scientific interest in the phenomenon reawakened. Today the existence of a Placebo Effect is not doubted--not in everyone, and not at all times, but it's existence is not doubted in relation to groups of people throughout their lives. The involvement of a neurochemical mechanism in the Placebo Effect is also supported by the literature presented, and chemicals such as CCK, Naloxone, Proglumide, and Endorphins seem to effect the neuronal webs mediating the Analgestic Placebo Effect.

Analgesics↗
PubMed2002

Randomised, cross-over, placebo controlled trial of magnesium citrate in the treatment of chronic persistent leg cramps.

BACKGROUND: Nocturnal leg cramps are common and distressing. The only treatment of proven effectiveness is quinine, but this has a number of side effects. Magnesium salts have been shown to reduce leg cramp distress in pregnancy. This study tests whether magnesium citrate is effective in the treatment of leg cramps in non-pregnant individuals by conducting in a randomised, double-blind, cross-over placebo-controlled trial. MATERIAL/METHODS: Volunteers suffering regular leg cramps were recruited. Magnesium citrate equivalent to 300 mg magnesium and matching placebo were given for 6 weeks each. The number of cramps recorded in the cramp diary during the final 4 weeks of magnesium and placebo treatment, severity and duration of cramps and the participants' subjective assessment of effectiveness were analysed. RESULTS: In subjects who started with placebo (n=29) the median (95% CI) number of cramps was 9 (6-17) on placebo and 5 (4-8) on magnesium. For the group starting with magnesium (n=17) the median no of cramps was 9 (5-13) on magnesium and 8 (4-14) on placebo. There was no significant carry-over effect (p=0.88), but a highly significant period effect (p=0.008). There was a trend towards less cramps on magnesium (p=0.07). There was no difference in cramp severity and duration between the groups. Significantly more subjects thought that the treatment had helped after magnesium than after placebo 36 (78%) and 25 (54%) respectively, (p=0.03). Diarrhoea was recorded as a side effect of magnesium. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that magnesium may be effective in treatment of nocturnal leg cramps. Further evaluation is recommended.

Aged↗
PubMed2002

Effects of transdermal and oral oestrogen replacement therapy on C-reactive protein levels in postmenopausal women: a randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

To investigate the effect of postmenopausal oral and transdermal hormone therapy on plasma levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), we performed a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, 15-month study. One hundred and fifty-two healthy hysterectomised postmenopausal women received daily either placebo (n = 49), or transdermal 17beta-oestradiol (E(2)) 50 micro g (tE(2) group, n = 33), or oral E(2) 1 mg (oE(2) group, n = 37), or oral E(2) 1 mg combined with gestodene 25 micro g (oE(2) + G group, n = 33) for thirteen 28-day treatment cycles, followed by four cycles placebo for each group. Data were collected at baseline and in cycles 4, 13 and 17. In cycle 13, CRP was significantly increased in the oE(2) group compared to placebo (P = 0.004). The median percentage change from baseline versus placebo was +75% (P <0.001). In cycle 17, significantly lower values were observed in the oE(2) group compared to cycle 13 and to the placebo group (-49%, P <0.001). There were no significant changes versus placebo in the other groups. In conclusion, oral E(2) significantly increased CRP levels. This change was larger than the increase found during oral E(2) + G. Transdermal E(2) did not affect CRP levels.

Administration, Cutaneous↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Relative efficacy and safety of loratadine, hydroxyzine, and placebo in chronic idiopathic urticaria and atopic dermatitis.

The subjects of this double-blind study were 59 patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria or atopic dermatitis randomly assigned to receive 10 mg of loratadine once daily and placebo twice daily (n = 20), 25 mg of hydroxyzine thrice daily (n = 20), or placebo thrice daily (n = 19). The patients (15 men, 44 women) were aged 18 to 65 years. Among the 18 patients with urticaria and 41 with atopic dermatitis, daily symptom scores decreased 43% and 57% in those receiving loratadine, 47% and 38% in those receiving hydroxyzine, and 0% and 33% in the placebo patients. The difference between the treated and placebo patients was significant among the urticaria patients. According to a global evaluation of treatment effects, more treated than placebo patients reported marked or complete symptom relief; among the patients with atopic dermatitis, the difference was significant between the loratadine and placebo patients. Somnolence or sedation during treatment was reported by one of the patients receiving loratadine, by eight of the hydroxyzine patients, and by two of the placebo patients; the difference between the loratadine and hydroxyzine patients was significant. It was concluded that loratadine is as effective as hydroxyzine in the treatment of urticaria and demonstrates a significant antipruritic effect in atopic dermatitis, but does not have the central nervous system effects of hydroxyzine.

Adolescent↗