search
Back to results

The Role of Learning in Nocebo Hyperalgesia

Primary Purpose

Nocebo Effects, Hyperalgesia, Chronic Pain

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Netherlands
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Conditioning with partial reinforcement
Conditioning with continuous reinforcement
Counterconditioning
Extinction
Sham Conditioning
Sponsored by
Leiden University Medical Center
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional basic science trial for Nocebo Effects focused on measuring Nocebo, Pain, Conditioning, Counterconditioning, Partial reinforcement, Learning

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 35 Years (Adult)All SexesAccepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Aged 18 - 35 years
  • Good understanding of the Dutch language

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Severe or chronic physical morbidity (e.g., heart and lung diseases, diabetes)
  • Psychiatric disorders (DSM diagnosis; e.g., depression, autism)
  • Chronic pain complaints (≥ 6 months) at present or in the past
  • Current pain
  • Current use of analgesic medication
  • Pregnancy
  • After inclusion, participants who do not reach a sensation of high pain with the highest temperature administered or participants who appear unable to distinguish between moderate and high pain stimuli will also be excluded

Sites / Locations

  • Leiden University

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm 3

Arm 4

Arm 5

Arm Type

Experimental

Experimental

Experimental

Experimental

Sham Comparator

Arm Label

Group 1

Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

Group 5

Arm Description

Conditioning nocebo effects on pain with a partial reinforcement schedule (induction) and counterconditioning of the previously induced nocebo effect (attenuation).

Conditioning nocebo effects on pain with a partial reinforcement schedule (induction) and extinction of the previously induced nocebo effect (attenuation).

Conditioning nocebo effects on pain with a continuous reinforcement schedule (induction) and counterconditioning of the previously induced nocebo effect (attenuation).

Conditioning nocebo effects on pain with a continuous reinforcement schedule (induction) and extinction of the previously induced nocebo effect (attenuation).

Sham conditioning of nocebo effects on pain (induction) and extinction (attenuation).

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Magnitude of nocebo effects on pain (rated on a 0-10 numeric rating scale) after PRF, CRF, or sham conditioning.
This will be calculated in the first evocation phase, by analysing the pain ratings for the first reinforced trial against the pain ratings for the first control trial.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Magnitude of nocebo effects on pain (rated on a 0-10 numeric rating scale) still present after counterconditioning or extinction.
This will be calculated by analysing the pain ratings for the first reinforced trial in the second evocation phase against the pain ratings for the first reinforced trial in the first evocation phase.

Full Information

First Posted
December 29, 2018
Last Updated
August 12, 2019
Sponsor
Leiden University Medical Center
Collaborators
Universiteit Leiden
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03793790
Brief Title
The Role of Learning in Nocebo Hyperalgesia
Official Title
Learning Mechanisms in Nocebo Hyperalgesia: the Role of Conditioning and Extinction Processes
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
August 2019
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
September 20, 2018 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
April 30, 2019 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
April 30, 2019 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Leiden University Medical Center
Collaborators
Universiteit Leiden

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Nocebo effects are adverse effects induced by patients' expectations. Nocebo effects on pain may underlie several clinical conditions, such as chronic pain. These effects can be learned via classical conditioning mechanisms. In the lab, nocebo effects are commonly studied via conditioning with continuous reinforcement (CRF) during which 100 percent of unconditioned pain stimuli are paired to conditioned stimuli (i.e., the activation of a mock medical device). Partial reinforcement (PRF) provides a more uncertain pairing during conditioning, where less than 100 percent of unconditioned pain stimuli are paired to conditioned stimuli. This method provides a potentially more clinically relevant learning platform to study how nocebo effects on pain are induced. In this study, the efficacy of conditioning with PRF, CRF, and sham-conditioning in inducing nocebo effects on pain will be compared. Furthermore, a counterconditioning method will be compared to an extinction method for the attenuation of nocebo effects on pain. Given the relevance of nocebo effects for patients, it is important to ascertain effective & clinically relevant methods to understand how nocebo effects may be formed and attenuated. This study is conducted by Leiden University.
Detailed Description
Main planned analyses: Primary Outcome; Comparing the effectivity of conditioning with PRF, conditioning with CRF, and sham conditioning, in inducing nocebo effects on pain: The magnitude of the induced nocebo effect during the first evocation phase (dependent variable), will be compared between induction groups (independent variable). The pain ratings for the first control trial will be measured against the pain ratings for the first reinforced trial, yielding the magnitude of the nocebo effect. A 3x2 mixed model Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) will be used, treating group as the between-subjects factor with three levels (PRF, CRF, sham) and magnitude of the nocebo effect on pain as a within-subjects measure with two levels (first control and first reinforced trial). Planned contrasts will be conducted. Secondary Outcome; Comparing the effectivity of counterconditioning and extinction in attenuating nocebo effects on pain: The nocebo effect still present in the second evocation phase (dependent variable) will be compared between attenuation groups (independent variable). This effect will be measured as the change in pain ratings reported in the first reinforced trial of the first evocation phase (after induction) and pain ratings reported in the first reinforced trial of the second evocation phase (after attenuation). This effect will be further analysed by measuring any change in pain reports for the control trials (second dependent variable) in the same way. The effect of induction group will also be further explored. A 2x2 mixed model ANOVA will be conducted, with attenuation group as the between-subjects factor (counterconditioning and extinction) and the degree to which the nocebo effect has been attenuated as the within-subjects measure with two levels (first and second evocation phase for the first reinforced trials). Further secondary analyses will be conducted.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Nocebo Effects, Hyperalgesia, Chronic Pain, Pain Syndrome
Keywords
Nocebo, Pain, Conditioning, Counterconditioning, Partial reinforcement, Learning

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Basic Science
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Model Description
This study employs a 2-by-2 design (i.e.,2 conditioning induction groups and 2 attenuation groups), with an additional control group (i.e., sham conditioning). Participants are thus allocated in 1 out of 5 groups.
Masking
ParticipantInvestigator
Masking Description
A double-blind randomization list (stratified for gender) was created by an independent statistician. Complete blinding of the researchers during the experiment is not possible due to the nature of conditioning paradigms. However, in this study blinding is optimized: the researchers are informed of the (conditioning) group to which participants are allocated after their final inclusion to the study, and after all questionnaires and pain calibration procedures have been completed on the testing day.
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
140 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Group 1
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Conditioning nocebo effects on pain with a partial reinforcement schedule (induction) and counterconditioning of the previously induced nocebo effect (attenuation).
Arm Title
Group 2
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Conditioning nocebo effects on pain with a partial reinforcement schedule (induction) and extinction of the previously induced nocebo effect (attenuation).
Arm Title
Group 3
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Conditioning nocebo effects on pain with a continuous reinforcement schedule (induction) and counterconditioning of the previously induced nocebo effect (attenuation).
Arm Title
Group 4
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Conditioning nocebo effects on pain with a continuous reinforcement schedule (induction) and extinction of the previously induced nocebo effect (attenuation).
Arm Title
Group 5
Arm Type
Sham Comparator
Arm Description
Sham conditioning of nocebo effects on pain (induction) and extinction (attenuation).
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Conditioning with partial reinforcement
Intervention Description
Conditioning with partial reinforcement (PRF) provides an uncertain pairing of unconditioned high pain stimuli and conditioned stimuli (i.e., on-screen messages signaling the activation of a mock medical device). During PRF only 70 percent of unconditioned stimuli are paired to conditioned stimuli. Pain of only moderate intensity is used for control stimuli that are paired to the deactivation of the mock device and are also used in the 30 percent of unreinforced trials.
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Conditioning with continuous reinforcement
Intervention Description
During conditioning with continuous reinforcement (CRF) unconditioned high pain stimuli are paired to conditioned stimuli (i.e., on-screen messages signaling the activation of a mock medical device) in 100 percent of conditioning trials. Pain of only moderate intensity is used for control stimuli that are paired to the deactivation of the mock device.
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Counterconditioning
Intervention Description
During counterconditioning, the previously conditioned nocebo effects on pain are attenuated by pairing the same conditioned stimuli (i.e., on-screen messages signaling the activation of a mock medical device) to thermal pain stimuli of low intensity.
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Extinction
Intervention Description
During extinction, the previously conditioned nocebo effects on pain are attenuated by pairing the same conditioned stimuli (i.e., on-screen messages signaling the activation of a mock medical device) only to control stimuli of moderate intensity (previously paired to the deactivation of the mock device).
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Sham Conditioning
Intervention Description
In the sham group, participants receive different instructions (namely, that the activation of the device is not expected to affect their pain sensitivity). Additionally, during sham conditioning unconditioned stimuli are not consistently paired to conditioned stimuli, thereby preventing the formation of an association between high pain stimuli and the activation of the mock medical device. In the attenuation phase participants undergo an extinction procedure.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Magnitude of nocebo effects on pain (rated on a 0-10 numeric rating scale) after PRF, CRF, or sham conditioning.
Description
This will be calculated in the first evocation phase, by analysing the pain ratings for the first reinforced trial against the pain ratings for the first control trial.
Time Frame
Testing day 1, in the 1st evocation phase
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Magnitude of nocebo effects on pain (rated on a 0-10 numeric rating scale) still present after counterconditioning or extinction.
Description
This will be calculated by analysing the pain ratings for the first reinforced trial in the second evocation phase against the pain ratings for the first reinforced trial in the first evocation phase.
Time Frame
Testing day 1, in the 2nd evocation phase
Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures:
Title
Possible resistance to extinction of induced nocebo effects on pain (rated on a 0-10 numeric rating scale) after PRF as compared to after CRF.
Description
Exploring whether participants in the PRF group will exhibit higher resistance to extinction during attenuation, as compared to participants in the CRF group. This will be assessed by analyzing the time-course of extinction of the previously induced nocebo effects on pain (rated on a 0-10 numeric rating scale) during the attenuation phase and the 2nd evocation phase
Time Frame
Testing day 1, in the attenuation phase and the 2nd evocation phase

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Gender Based
Yes
Gender Eligibility Description
Participants whose gender identity, gender expression, and lived gender is male, will be included as male. Participants whose gender identity, gender expression, and lived gender is female, will be included as female.
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
35 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Aged 18 - 35 years Good understanding of the Dutch language Exclusion Criteria: Severe or chronic physical morbidity (e.g., heart and lung diseases, diabetes) Psychiatric disorders (DSM diagnosis; e.g., depression, autism) Chronic pain complaints (≥ 6 months) at present or in the past Current pain Current use of analgesic medication Pregnancy After inclusion, participants who do not reach a sensation of high pain with the highest temperature administered or participants who appear unable to distinguish between moderate and high pain stimuli will also be excluded
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Andrea WM Evers, Prof. Dr.
Organizational Affiliation
Leiden University Medical Center
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Leiden University
City
Leiden
State/Province
South Holland
ZIP/Postal Code
2333 AL
Country
Netherlands

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
Yes
IPD Sharing Plan Description
All data are collected pseudonymised thus no personal data are stored or shared. Consent forms are the only sources containing personal data and will not be shared, but are monitored by the department's Data Monitor.
IPD Sharing Time Frame
Data will become available immediately after publication of the study and will be retained for 15 years.
IPD Sharing Access Criteria
Data can be shared with scientists in relevant fields for the purpose of future studies such as replication or meta-analysis (or with designated persons for monitoring purposes).

Learn more about this trial

The Role of Learning in Nocebo Hyperalgesia

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs