Cargando…
Mechanisms of Perceived Treatment Assignment and Subsequent Expectancy Effects in a Double Blind Placebo Controlled RCT of Major Depression
Objective: It has been suggested that patients' perception of treatment assignment might serve to bias results of double blind randomized controlled trials (RCT). Most previous evidence on the effects of patients' perceptions and the mechanisms influencing these perceptions relies on cross...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6137256/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30245644 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00424 |
_version_ | 1783355151845687296 |
---|---|
author | Laferton, Johannes A. C. Vijapura, Sagar Baer, Lee Clain, Alisabet J. Cooper, Abigail Papakostas, George Price, Lawrence H. Carpenter, Linda L. Tyrka, Audrey R. Fava, Maurizio Mischoulon, David |
author_facet | Laferton, Johannes A. C. Vijapura, Sagar Baer, Lee Clain, Alisabet J. Cooper, Abigail Papakostas, George Price, Lawrence H. Carpenter, Linda L. Tyrka, Audrey R. Fava, Maurizio Mischoulon, David |
author_sort | Laferton, Johannes A. C. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Objective: It has been suggested that patients' perception of treatment assignment might serve to bias results of double blind randomized controlled trials (RCT). Most previous evidence on the effects of patients' perceptions and the mechanisms influencing these perceptions relies on cross-sectional associations. This re-analysis of a double blind, placebo controlled RCT of pharmacological treatment of major depression set out to gather longitudinal evidence on the mechanism and effects of patients' perceived treatment assignment in the pharmacological treatment of major depression. Methods: One-hundred eighty-nine outpatients with DSM-IV diagnosed major depression were randomized to SAMe 1,600–3,200 mg/d, escitalopram 10–20 mg/days, or placebo for 12 weeks. Data on depressive symptoms (17-item Hamilton Depression Scale; HDRS-17), adverse events and patients' perceived treatment assignment was collected at baseline, week 6, and week 12. The re-analysis focused on N = 166 (out of the originally included 189 participants) with available data on perceived treatment assignment. Results: As in the parent trial, depressive symptoms (HDRS-17) significantly decreased over the course of 12 weeks and there was no difference between placebo, SAMe or escitalopram. A significant number of patients changed their perceptions about treatment assignment throughout the trial, especially between baseline and week 6. Improvement in depressive symptoms, but not adverse events significantly predicted perceived treatment assignment at week 6. In turn, perceived treatment assignment at week 6, but not actual treatment, predicted further improvement in depressive symptoms at week 12. Conclusions: The current results provide longitudinal evidence that patients' perception of treatment assignment systematically change despite a double blind procedure and in turn might trigger expectancy effects with the potential to bias the validity of an RCT. Parent study grant number: R01 AT001638 Parent study ClinicalTrials. gov Identifier: NCT00101452 |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6137256 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-61372562018-09-21 Mechanisms of Perceived Treatment Assignment and Subsequent Expectancy Effects in a Double Blind Placebo Controlled RCT of Major Depression Laferton, Johannes A. C. Vijapura, Sagar Baer, Lee Clain, Alisabet J. Cooper, Abigail Papakostas, George Price, Lawrence H. Carpenter, Linda L. Tyrka, Audrey R. Fava, Maurizio Mischoulon, David Front Psychiatry Psychiatry Objective: It has been suggested that patients' perception of treatment assignment might serve to bias results of double blind randomized controlled trials (RCT). Most previous evidence on the effects of patients' perceptions and the mechanisms influencing these perceptions relies on cross-sectional associations. This re-analysis of a double blind, placebo controlled RCT of pharmacological treatment of major depression set out to gather longitudinal evidence on the mechanism and effects of patients' perceived treatment assignment in the pharmacological treatment of major depression. Methods: One-hundred eighty-nine outpatients with DSM-IV diagnosed major depression were randomized to SAMe 1,600–3,200 mg/d, escitalopram 10–20 mg/days, or placebo for 12 weeks. Data on depressive symptoms (17-item Hamilton Depression Scale; HDRS-17), adverse events and patients' perceived treatment assignment was collected at baseline, week 6, and week 12. The re-analysis focused on N = 166 (out of the originally included 189 participants) with available data on perceived treatment assignment. Results: As in the parent trial, depressive symptoms (HDRS-17) significantly decreased over the course of 12 weeks and there was no difference between placebo, SAMe or escitalopram. A significant number of patients changed their perceptions about treatment assignment throughout the trial, especially between baseline and week 6. Improvement in depressive symptoms, but not adverse events significantly predicted perceived treatment assignment at week 6. In turn, perceived treatment assignment at week 6, but not actual treatment, predicted further improvement in depressive symptoms at week 12. Conclusions: The current results provide longitudinal evidence that patients' perception of treatment assignment systematically change despite a double blind procedure and in turn might trigger expectancy effects with the potential to bias the validity of an RCT. Parent study grant number: R01 AT001638 Parent study ClinicalTrials. gov Identifier: NCT00101452 Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-09-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6137256/ /pubmed/30245644 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00424 Text en Copyright © 2018 Laferton, Vijapura, Baer, Clain, Cooper, Papakostas, Price, Carpenter, Tyrka, Fava and Mischoulon. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Psychiatry Laferton, Johannes A. C. Vijapura, Sagar Baer, Lee Clain, Alisabet J. Cooper, Abigail Papakostas, George Price, Lawrence H. Carpenter, Linda L. Tyrka, Audrey R. Fava, Maurizio Mischoulon, David Mechanisms of Perceived Treatment Assignment and Subsequent Expectancy Effects in a Double Blind Placebo Controlled RCT of Major Depression |
title | Mechanisms of Perceived Treatment Assignment and Subsequent Expectancy Effects in a Double Blind Placebo Controlled RCT of Major Depression |
title_full | Mechanisms of Perceived Treatment Assignment and Subsequent Expectancy Effects in a Double Blind Placebo Controlled RCT of Major Depression |
title_fullStr | Mechanisms of Perceived Treatment Assignment and Subsequent Expectancy Effects in a Double Blind Placebo Controlled RCT of Major Depression |
title_full_unstemmed | Mechanisms of Perceived Treatment Assignment and Subsequent Expectancy Effects in a Double Blind Placebo Controlled RCT of Major Depression |
title_short | Mechanisms of Perceived Treatment Assignment and Subsequent Expectancy Effects in a Double Blind Placebo Controlled RCT of Major Depression |
title_sort | mechanisms of perceived treatment assignment and subsequent expectancy effects in a double blind placebo controlled rct of major depression |
topic | Psychiatry |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6137256/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30245644 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2018.00424 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT lafertonjohannesac mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression AT vijapurasagar mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression AT baerlee mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression AT clainalisabetj mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression AT cooperabigail mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression AT papakostasgeorge mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression AT pricelawrenceh mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression AT carpenterlindal mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression AT tyrkaaudreyr mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression AT favamaurizio mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression AT mischoulondavid mechanismsofperceivedtreatmentassignmentandsubsequentexpectancyeffectsinadoubleblindplacebocontrolledrctofmajordepression |