How to study placebo responses in motion sickness with a rotation chair paradigm in healthy participants

Placebo effects on nausea and motion sickness are resistant to experimentally-induced stress

Nausea often occurs in stressful situations, such as chemotherapy or surgery. Clinically relevant placebo effects in nausea have been demonstrated, but it remains unclear whether stress has an impact on these effects. The aim of this experimental study was to investigate the interplay between acute stress and placebo effects in nausea. 80 healthy female volunteers susceptible to motion sickness were randomly assigned to either the Maastricht Acute Stress Test or a non-stress control condition, and to either placebo treatment or no treatment. Nausea was induced by a virtual vection drum and behavioral, psychophysiological as well as humoral parameters were repeatedly assessed. Manipulation checks confirmed increased cortisol levels and negative emotions in the stressed groups. In the non-stressed groups, the placebo intervention improved nausea, symptoms of motion sickness, and gastric myoelectrical activity (normo-to-tachy (NTT) ratio). In the stressed groups, the beneficial effects of the placebo intervention on nausea and motion sickness remained unchanged, whereas no improvement of the gastric NTT ratio was observed. Results suggest that placebo effects on symptoms of nausea and motion sickness are resistant to experimentally-induced stress. Stress most likely interfered with the validity of the gastric NTT ratio to measure nausea and thus the gastric placebo effect.

Antihistamines for motion sickness

BACKGROUND

Motion sickness is a syndrome that occurs as a result of passive body movement in response to actual motion, or the illusion of motion when exposed to virtual and moving visual environments. The most common symptoms are nausea and vomiting. Antihistamines have been used in the management of motion sickness for decades, however studies have shown conflicting results regarding their efficacy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of antihistamines in the prevention and treatment of motion sickness in adults and children.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane ENT Information Specialist searched the Cochrane ENT Register; Central Register of Controlled Trials; Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid Embase; Web of Science; ClinicalTrials.gov; ICTRP and additional sources for published and unpublished trials. The date of the search was 7 December 2021.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in susceptible adults and children in whom motion sickness was induced under natural conditions such as air, sea and land transportation. We also included studies in which motion sickness was induced under experimental conditions (analysed separately). Antihistamines were included regardless of class, route or dosage and compared to no treatment, placebo or any other pharmacological or non-pharmacological interventions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1) the proportion of susceptible participants who did not experience any motion sickness symptoms; 2) the proportion of susceptible participants who experienced a reduction or resolution of existing symptoms. Secondary outcomes were 1) physiological measures (heart rate, core temperature and gastric tachyarrhythmia (electrogastrography)) and 2) adverse effects (sedation, impaired cognition, blurred vision). We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs (658 participants). Studies were conducted across seven countries, with an overall age range of 16 to 55 years. Motion sickness was induced naturally in six studies and experimentally in four studies (rotating chair). All the naturally induced studies only evaluated first-generation antihistamines (cinnarizine and dimenhydrinate). Risk of bias across the studies varied, with mostly low risk for random sequence generation and allocation concealment, and mostly high risk for selective reporting. Only the experimentally induced studies measured physiological parameters and only the naturally induced studies evaluated adverse effects. There were no studies that clearly assessed the paediatric population. Antihistamines versus placebo or no treatment Antihistamines are probably more effective than placebo at preventing motion sickness symptoms under natural conditions (symptoms prevented: 25% placebo; 40% antihistamines) (risk ratio (RR) 1.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23 to 2.66; 3 studies; 240 participants) (moderate-certainty). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on preventing motion sickness under experimental conditions (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.32, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.83; 2 studies; 62 participants) (very low-certainty). No studies reported results on the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in gastric tachyarrhythmia under experimental conditions (mean difference (MD) -2.2, 95% CI -11.71 to 7.31; 1 study; 42 participants) (low-certainty). No studies reported results for any other physiological measures. When compared to placebo, antihistamines may be more likely to cause sedation (sedation: 44% placebo; 66% antihistamines) (RR 1.51, 95% CI 1.12 to 2.02; 2 studies; 190 participants) (low-certainty); they may result in little or no difference in blurred vision (blurred vision: 12.5% placebo; 14% antihistamines) (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.53 to 2.48; 2 studies; 190 participants) (low-certainty); and they may result in little or no difference in terms of impaired cognition (impaired cognition: 33% placebo; 29% antihistamines) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.38; 2 studies; 190 participants) (low-certainty). Antihistamines versus scopolamine The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on preventing motion sickness under natural conditions when compared to scopolamine (symptoms prevented: 81% scopolamine; 71% antihistamines) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.16; 2 studies; 71 participants) (very low-certainty). No studies were performed under experimental conditions. No studies reported results on the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on heart rate under natural conditions (narrative report, 1 study; 20 participants; "No difference in pulse frequency"; very low-certainty). No studies reported results for any other physiological measures. When compared to scopolamine, the evidence is very uncertain about the effect of antihistamines on sedation (sedation: 21% scopolamine; 30% antihistamines) (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.07 to 9.25; 2 studies; 90 participants) (very low-certainty) and on blurred vision (narrative report: not a significant difference; 1 study; 51 participants; very low-certainty). No studies evaluated impaired cognition. Antihistamines versus antiemetics Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in the prevention of motion sickness under experimental conditions (MD -0.20, 95% CI -10.91 to 10.51; 1 study; 42 participants) (low-certainty). The evidence is of low certainty due to imprecision as the sample size is small and the confidence interval crosses the line of no effect. No studies assessed the effects of antihistamines versus antiemetics under natural conditions. No studies reported results on the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in gastric tachyarrhythmia (MD 4.56, 95% CI -3.49 to 12.61; 1 study; 42 participants) (low-certainty). No studies reported results for any other physiological measures. No studies evaluated sedation, impaired cognition or blurred vision. One study reported physiological data for this outcome, evaluating gastric tachyarrhythmia specifically. Antihistamines may result in little or no difference in gastric tachyarrhythmia (MD 4.56, 95% CI -3.49 to 12.61; 1 study; 42 participants; low-certainty evidence). This evidence is of low certainty due to imprecision as the sample size is small and the confidence interval crosses the line of no effect. Antihistamines versus acupuncture The evidence is very uncertain about the effects of antihistamines on the prevention of motion sickness under experimental conditions when compared to acupuncture (RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.57; 1 study; 100 participants) (very low-certainty). This study did not assess the prevention of motion sickness under natural conditions, nor the resolution of existing motion sickness symptoms. There was no study performed under natural conditions. Physiological measures and adverse effects were not reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is probably a reduction in the risk of developing motion sickness symptoms under naturally occurring conditions of motion when using first-generation antihistamines, in motion sickness-susceptible adults, compared to placebo. Antihistamines may be more likely to cause sedation when compared to placebo. No studies evaluated the treatment of existing motion sickness, and there are few data on the effect of antihistamines in children. The evidence for all other outcomes and comparisons (versus scopolamine, antiemetics and acupuncture) was of low or very low certainty and we are therefore uncertain about these effects of antihistamines.

A clinical study on safety and efficacy of Naesohwajung-tang on functional dyspepsia

BACKGROUND

Functional dyspepsia (FD) is a chronic gastrointestinal disorder diagnosed with dyspeptic symptoms, such as recurrent or persistent postprandial fullness, epigastric pain, burning, and early satiety without any evidence of structural abnormality. In traditional Korean medicine, herbal remedies are one of the preferred treatments for gastrointestinal symptoms. Among them, Naesohwajung-tang (NHT) has been frequently prescribed to improve dyspeptic symptoms for a long time. However, the safety and efficacy of NHT still remain unclear. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the safety and efficacy of NHT in patients with FD using a randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

This is a protocol for a multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Total 116 participants aged between 19 and 75 years diagnosed with FD according to the Rome IV diagnosis criteria will be recruited at two Korean medicine hospitals. Eligible participants will be randomly assigned to either a NHT group or a placebo group in a 1:1 ratio. Each participant will be instructed to take NHT or placebo granules three times a day for 4 weeks. The primary outcome is the change in the total dyspepsia symptom score to confirm the efficacy of NHT. The secondary outcomes include overall total effect, single dyspepsia symptom scale, food retention questionnaire, Damum questionnaire, FD-related quality of life, electrogastrography, and safety assessments. Adverse events will be evaluated at every visit. The primary endpoint will be measured at week 4, and then re-evaluated at week 8 through a follow-up phone visit.

DISCUSSION

This trial will evaluate the safety and efficacy of NHT as a treatment of FD. The results of this trial will not only verify whether NHT improves FD symptoms and gastric myoelectrical activity, but also clarify those correlations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRIS KCT0003405.

Does Sex/Gender Play a Role in Placebo and Nocebo Effects? Conflicting Evidence From Clinical Trials and Experimental Studies

Sex has been speculated to be a predictor of the placebo and nocebo effect for many years, but whether this holds true or not has rarely been investigated. We utilized a placebo literature database on various aspects of the genuine placebo/nocebo response. In 2015, we had extracted 75 systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-regressions performed in major medical areas (neurology, psychiatry, internal medicine). These meta-analyses were screened for whether sex/gender differences had been noted to contribute to the placebo/nocebo effect: in only 3 such analyses female sex was associated with a higher placebo effect, indicating poor evidence for a contribution of sex to it in RCTs. This was updated with another set of meta-analyses for the current review, but did not change the overall conclusion. The same holds true for 18 meta-analyses investigating adverse event (nocebo) reporting in RCT in the placebo arm of trials. We also screened our database for papers referring to sex/gender and the placebo effect in experimental studies, and identified 28 papers reporting 29 experiments. Their results can be summarized as follows: (a) Despite higher sensitivity of pain in females, placebo analgesia is easier to elicit in males; (b) It appears that conditioning is effective specifically eliciting nocebo effects; (c) Conditioning works specifically well to elicit placebo and nocebo effects in females and with nausea; (d) Verbal suggestions are not sufficient to induce analgesia in women, but work in men. These results will be discussed with respect to the question why nausea and pain may be prone to be responsive to sex/gender differences, while other symptoms are less. Lastly, we will discuss the apparent discrepancy between RCT with low relevance of sex, and higher relevance of sex in specific experimental settings. We argue that the placebo response is predominantly the result of a conditioning (learning) response in females, while in males it predominantly may be generated via (verbal) manipulating of expectancies. In RCT therefore, the net outcome of the intervention may be the same despite different mechanisms generating the placebo effect between the sexes, while in experimental work when both pathways are separated and explicitly explored, such differences may surface.

Impaired Gastric Myoelectrical Reactivity in Children and Adolescents with Obesity Compared to Normal-Weight Controls

Obesity often has its onset in childhood and can be accompanied by various comorbidities such as functional gastrointestinal disorders and altered gastric myoelectrical activity (GMA). This study investigates whether obesity in childhood and adolescence is already associated with altered GMA, and whether an inpatient weight loss program affects GMA. Sixty children with obesity (OBE) and 27 normal-weight children (NW) (12.9 ± 1.7 years; 51% female) were compared for their GMA at rest, after a stress test, and after a drink-to-full water load test. A continuous electrogastrogram (EGG) was recorded and analyzed with respect to gastric slow waves and tachygastric activity. OBE were examined upon admission (T1) and before discharge (T2) following an inpatient weight loss program; NW served as control group. Compared to NW, children with obesity showed flattened GMA as indicated by lower tachygastric reactivity after stress and water load test at T1. Data of OBE did not differ between T1 and T2. EGG parameters were associated neither with sex, age, and BMI nor with subjective stress and food intake. Children with obesity show impaired gastric myoelectrical reactivity in response to a stress and water load test compared to normal-weight controls, which does not change during an inpatient weight loss program.

Different Disclosed Probabilities to Receive an Antiemetic Equally Decrease Subjective Symptoms in an Experimental Placebo Study: To Be or Not to Be Sure

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to examine whether the disclosed probability of receiving an antiemetic affects nausea.

METHODS

Forty-eight healthy participants (mean [SD] age, 26.8 [5.4] years; 50% female) were exposed to 5 × 2 minutes of nauseogenic body rotations on 2 days. On day 2, participants were randomized to 3 experimental groups that were given different instructions concerning the probability of receiving an antiemetic remedy (100%, 50%, or 0% probability), whereas all received an inert substance. Subjective symptoms, behavioral (rotation tolerance) measures, and physiologic (electrogastrogram) measures of nausea were assessed and mediator and moderator analyses performed for effects of expectations and psychological characteristics on outcomes.

FINDINGS

Disclosed probabilities of both 100% and 50% significantly reduced subjective symptoms of nausea in an equal manner compared with the 0% probability group from day 1 to day 2. This effect was found for neither rotation tolerance nor myoelectric gastric activity. Expectations and psychological characteristics did not affect the results found. Post hoc analyses revealed that women only seem to be susceptible to this placebo effect.

IMPLICATIONS

Nausea is susceptible to placebo effects independent of the disclosed probability of receiving a drug and of explicit expectations. In line with placebo research, this effect is probably attributable to central mechanisms, and it is speculated that it could be related to the reward circuitry and social interactions.