Prescribing "placebo treatments": results of national survey of US internists and rheumatologists
- PMID: 18948346
- PMCID: PMC2572204
- DOI: 10.1136/bmj.a1938
Prescribing "placebo treatments": results of national survey of US internists and rheumatologists
Abstract
Objective: To describe the attitudes and behaviours regarding placebo treatments, defined as a treatment whose benefits derive from positive patient expectations and not from the physiological mechanism of the treatment itself.
Design: Cross sectional mailed survey.
Setting: Physicians' clinical practices.
Participants: 1200 practising internists and rheumatologists in the United States.
Main outcome measures: Investigators measured physicians' self reported behaviours and attitudes concerning the use of placebo treatments, including measures of whether they would use or had recommended a "placebo treatment," their ethical judgments about the practice, what they recommended as placebo treatments, and how they typically communicate with patients about the practice.
Results: 679 physicians (57%) responded to the survey. About half of the surveyed internists and rheumatologists reported prescribing placebo treatments on a regular basis (46-58%, depending on how the question was phrased). Most physicians (399, 62%) believed the practice to be ethically permissible. Few reported using saline (18, 3%) or sugar pills (12, 2%) as placebo treatments, while large proportions reported using over the counter analgesics (267, 41%) and vitamins (243, 38%) as placebo treatments within the past year. A small but notable proportion of physicians reported using antibiotics (86, 13%) and sedatives (86, 13%) as placebo treatments during the same period. Furthermore, physicians who use placebo treatments most commonly describe them to patients as a potentially beneficial medicine or treatment not typically used for their condition (241, 68%); only rarely do they explicitly describe them as placebos (18, 5%).
Conclusions: Prescribing placebo treatments seems to be common and is viewed as ethically permissible among the surveyed US internists and rheumatologists. Vitamins and over the counter analgesics are the most commonly used treatments. Physicians might not be fully transparent with their patients about the use of placebos and might have mixed motivations for recommending such treatments.
Conflict of interest statement
Competing interests: None declared.
Comment in
-
Illusion is disease mongering.BMJ. 2008 Nov 25;337:a2686. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a2686. BMJ. 2008. PMID: 19033341 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Placebo Trends across the Border: US versus Canada.PLoS One. 2015 Nov 25;10(11):e0142804. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142804. eCollection 2015. PLoS One. 2015. PMID: 26606749 Free PMC article.
-
Placebos in pediatrics: A cross-sectional survey investigating physicians' perspectives.J Psychosom Res. 2023 Sep;172:111421. doi: 10.1016/j.jpsychores.2023.111421. Epub 2023 Jun 19. J Psychosom Res. 2023. PMID: 37354748
-
Primary care providers' use of and attitudes towards placebos: An exploratory focus group study with US physicians.Br J Health Psychol. 2020 Sep;25(3):596-614. doi: 10.1111/bjhp.12429. Epub 2020 May 30. Br J Health Psychol. 2020. PMID: 32472982 Free PMC article.
-
How often do general practitioners use placebos and non-specific interventions? Systematic review and meta-analysis of surveys.PLoS One. 2018 Aug 24;13(8):e0202211. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0202211. eCollection 2018. PLoS One. 2018. PMID: 30142199 Free PMC article.
-
Are Blue Pills Better Than Green? How Treatment Features Modulate Placebo Effects.Int Rev Neurobiol. 2018;139:357-378. doi: 10.1016/bs.irn.2018.07.014. Epub 2018 Aug 6. Int Rev Neurobiol. 2018. PMID: 30146054 Review.
Cited by
-
Why empathy has a beneficial impact on others in medicine: unifying theories.Front Behav Neurosci. 2015 Jan 14;8:457. doi: 10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00457. eCollection 2014. Front Behav Neurosci. 2015. PMID: 25642175 Free PMC article.
-
Open-label placebo reduces fatigue in cancer survivors: a randomized trial.Support Care Cancer. 2019 Jun;27(6):2179-2187. doi: 10.1007/s00520-018-4477-6. Epub 2018 Oct 10. Support Care Cancer. 2019. PMID: 30298411 Clinical Trial.
-
Placebo: a brief updated review.Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2022 Nov;395(11):1343-1356. doi: 10.1007/s00210-022-02280-w. Epub 2022 Aug 9. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol. 2022. PMID: 35943515 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Measuring the placebo effect in carpal tunnel syndrome.J Orthop Traumatol. 2020 Jan 28;21(1):1. doi: 10.1186/s10195-019-0540-4. J Orthop Traumatol. 2020. PMID: 31993783 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Are open-Label Placebos Ethical? Informed Consent and Ethical Equivocations.Bioethics. 2016 Jul;30(6):407-14. doi: 10.1111/bioe.12245. Epub 2016 Feb 3. Bioethics. 2016. PMID: 26840547 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Beecher HK. The powerful placebo. JAMA 1955;159:1602-6. - PubMed
-
- Hrobjertsson A, Gotzsche PC. Is the placebo powerless? An analysis of clinical trials comparing placebo treatment with no treatment. N Engl J Med 2001;344:1594-602. - PubMed
-
- Miller FG, Rosenstein DL. The nature and power of the placebo effect. J Clin Epidemiol 2006;59:331-5. - PubMed
-
- Kaptchuk TJ. Powerful placebo: the dark side of the randomized controlled trial. Lancet 1998;351:1722-5. - PubMed
-
- Tuke DH. Illustrations of the influence of the mind upon the body in health and disease designed to elucidate the action of the imagination. Philadelphia: Henry C Lea, 1873.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous