Modification of induced ischaemic pain by placebo electrotherapy

Quantifying the analgesic effect of placebo electrotherapy is an important part of understanding the placebo response in physiotherapy. This repeated measures study of induced ischaemic pain compared reports of pain threshold, pain tolerance, and pain endurance under three conditions: control, placebo interferential, and placebo TENS. Both of the placebo conditions significantly delayed the report of pain threshold. Placebo interferential also delayed pain tolerance. Each placebo condition reduced pain intensity in the 6th minute. Only placebo TENS reduced pain at the 9th minute of ischaemic pain. The nature of pain reduction in the placebo conditions suggests that analgesia was due to learned expectancies and endogenous opioid release. Further research into the impact of positive expectancies of pain relief in our patients could clarify the efficacy of physiotherapy outcomes for pain.

An investigation of the interrelationship between manipulative therapy-induced hypoalgesia and sympathoexcitation

Objective: To investigate a proposed model in which manipulative therapy produces a treatment-specific initial hypoalgesic and sympathoexcitatory effect by activating a descending pain inhibitory system. The a priori hypothesis tested was that manipulative therapy produces mechanical hypoalgesia and sympatho-excitation beyond that produced by placebo or control. Furthermore, these effects would be correlated, thus supporting the proposed model. Design: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, repeated-measures study of the initial effect of treatment. Setting: Clinical neurophysiology laboratory. Subjects: Twenty-four subjects (13 women and 11 men; mean age, 49 yr) with chronic lateral epicondylalgia (average duration, 6.2 months). Intervention: Cervical spine lateral glide oscillatory manipulation, placebo and control. Outcome Measures: Pressure pain threshold, thermal pain threshold, pain-free grip strength test, upper limb tension test 2b, skin conductance, pileous and glabrous skin temperature and blood flux. Results: Treatment produced hypoalgesic and sympathoexcitatory changes significantly grater than those of placebo and control (p < .03). Confirmatory factor-analysis modeling, which was performed on the pain-related measures and the indicators of sympathetic nervous system function, demonstrated a significant correlation (r = .82) between the latencies of manipulation-induced hypoalgesia and sympathoexcitation. The Lagrange Multiplier test and Wald test indicated that the two latent factors parsimoniously and appropriately represented their observed variables. Conclusions: Manual therapy produces a treatment-specific initial hypoalgesic and sympathoexcitatory effect beyond that of placebo or control. The strong correlation between hypoalgesic and sympathoexcitatory effects suggests that a central control mechanism might be activated by manipulative therapy.

Design of the multicenter Australian study of epidural anesthesia and analgesia in major surgery: The MASTER Trial

The Multicenter Australian Study of Epidural Anesthesia and Analgesia in Major Surgery (The MASTER Trial) was designed to evaluate the possible benefit of epidural block in improving outcome in high-risk patients. The trial began in 1995 and is scheduled to reach the planned sample size of 900 during 2001. This paper describes the trial design and presents data comparing 455 patients randomized in 21 institutions in Australia, Hong Kong, and Malaysia, with 237 patients from the same hospitals who were eligible but not randomized. Nine categories of high-risk patients were defined as entry criteria for the trial. Protocols for ethical review, informed consent, randomization, clinical anesthesia and analgesia, and perioperative management were determined following extensive consultation with anesthesiologists throughout Australia. Clinical and research information was collected in participating hospitals by research staff who may not have been blind to allocation. Decisions about the presence or absence of endpoints were made primarily by a computer algorithm, supplemented by blinded clinical experts. Without unblinding the trial, comparison of eligibility criteria and incidence of endpoints between randomized and nonrandomized patients showed only small differences. We conclude that there is no strong evidence of important demographic or clinical differences between randomized and nonrandomized patients eligible for the MASTER Trial. Thus, the trial results are likely to be broadly generalizable. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:244-256 (C) Elsevier Science Inc. 2000.

Preliminary experiences with a single-patient trials service in general practice

Objective: To pilot a single-patient trials (SPTs) service in general practice, designed to improve decision-making about long-term medications for chronic conditions. Design: 12-week within-patient, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover comparison of ibuprofen with paracetamol for osteoarthritis, involving three pairs of two-week treatment periods for each participating patient. Setting and patients: Patients attending an academic general practice with a clinical diagnosis of osteoarthritis, with pain of at least a month's duration severe enough to warrant consideration of long-term non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use. Main outcome measures: Pain and stiffness; measures of overall arthritis compared with previous fortnight; preference for NSAID at the end of each two-week treatment period; use of escape analgesia; side effects; and management changes as a result of the SPTs. Results: Eight of 14 patients completed SPTs. One was a clear responder to NSAIDs, five were non-responders, and two were indefinite. Of the five who were using NSAIDs before the SPT, two continued and three ceased using them. Clinically useful information assisted decision-making for all eight participants. Medication management changed for six. Conclusions: Single-patient trials can be successfully implemented in general practice and might be a valuable method for GPs to identify patients who respond to medication for chronic stable conditions such as osteoarthritis, in which individual response to medication is variable.

Epidural anaesthesia and analgesia and outcome of major surgery: a randomised trial

Background Epidural block is widely used to manage major abdominal surgery and postoperative analgesia, but its risks. and benefits are uncertain. We compared adverse outcomes in high-risk patients managed for major surgery with epidural block or alternative analgesic regimens with general anaesthesia in a multicentre randomised trial. Methods 915 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery with one of nine defined comorbid states to identify high-risk status were randomly assigned intraoperative epidural anaesthesia and postoperative epidural analgesia for 72 h with general anaesthesia (site of epidural selected to provide optimum block) or control. The primary endpoint was death at 30 days or major postsurgical morbidity. Analysis by intention to treat involved 447 patients assigned epidural and 441 control. Findings 255 patients (57.1%) in the epidural group and 268 (60.7%) in the control group had at least one morbidity endpoint or died (p=0.29). Mortality at 30 days was low in both groups (epidural 23 [5.1%], control 19 [4.3%], p=0.67). Only one of eight categories of morbid endpoints in individual systems (respiratory failure) occurred less frequently in patients managed with epidural techniques (23% vs 30%, p=0.02). Postoperative epidural analgesia was associated with lower pain scores during the first 3 postoperative days. There were no major adverse consequences of epidural-catheter insertion. Interpretation Most adverse morbid outcomes in high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal surgery are not reduced by use of combined epidural and general anaesthesia and postoperative epidural analgesia. However, the improvement in analgesia, reduction in respiratory failure, and the low risk of serious adverse consequences suggest that many high-risk patients undergoing major intra-abdominal surgery will receive substantial benefit from combined general and epidural anaesthesia intraoperatively with continuing postoperative epidural analgesia.

Perioperative epidural analgesia and outcome after major abdominal surgery in high-risk patients

In a primary analysis of a large recently completed randomized trial in 915 high-risk patients undergoing major abdominal surgery, we found no difference in outcome between patients receiving perioperative epidural analgesia and those receiving IV opioids, apart from the incidence of respiratory failure. Therefore, we performed a selected number of predetermined subgroup analyses to identify specific types of patients who may have derived benefit from epidural analgesia. We found no difference in outcome between epidural and control groups in subgroups at increased risk of respiratory or cardiac complications or undergoing aortic surgery, nor in a subgroup with failed epidural block (all P > 0.05). There was a small reduction in the duration of postoperative ventilation (geometric mean [SD]: control group, 0.3 [6.5] h, versus epidural group, 0.2 [4.8] h, P = 0.048). No differences were found in length of stay in intensive care or in the hospital. There was no relationship between frequency of use of epidural analgesia in routine practice outside the trial and benefit from epidural analgesia in the trial. We found no evidence that perioperative epidural analgesia significantly influences major morbidity or mortality after major abdominal surgery.

Examining the influence of biological and psychological factors on cognitive performance in chronic fatigue syndrome: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study

The pathophysiology of chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) remains unclear; however, both biological and psychological factors have been implicated in establishing or maintaining this condition. People with CFS report significant and disabling cognitive difficulties such as impaired concentration that in some cases are exacerbated by exposure to chemical triggers. The aim of this study was to determine if neuropsychological deficits in CFS are triggered by exposure to chemicals, or perceptions about the properties of these substances. Participants were 36 people with a primary diagnosis of CFS, defined according to Centers for Disease Control (CDC) criteria. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover design was used, with objective assessment of neuropsychological function and participant rating of substance type, before and after exposure to placebo or chemical trigger. Results showed decrements in neuropsychological tests scores on three out of four outcome measures when participants rated the substance they had been exposed to as chemical. No change in performance was found based on actual substance type. These results suggest that cognitive attributions about exposure substances in people with CFS may be associated with worse performance on neuropsychological tasks. In addition, these findings suggest that psychological interventions aimed at modifying substance-related cognitions may reduce some symptoms of CFS.

The initial effects of a cervical spine manipulative physiotherapy treatment on the pain and dysfunction of lateral epicondylalgia

Manipulative therapy is frequently used in the management of musculoskeletal pain. A frequently reported clinical feature of this treatment is the immediacy with which it appears to initiate improvement in pain and function. A randomised, double blind, placebo controlled, repeated measures design was employed to study the initial effects of a cervical spine treatment technique in a group of 15 patients with lateral epicondylalgia. Pressure pain threshold, pain-free grip strength, upper limb neurodynamics, pain and function were assessed prior to and following application of either a treatment, placebo or control condition. All subjects received all three conditions. Differences between the pre-post measures were used as indicators of change in subject's symptom profiles. The treatment condition produced significant improvement in pressure pain threshold, pain-free grip strength, neurodynamics and pain scores relative to placebo and control conditions (P < 0.05). In summary, this study demonstrates that manipulative therapy is capable of eliciting a rapid hypoalgesic effect.

Specific manipulative therapy treatment for chronic lateral epicondylalgia produces uniquely characteristic hypoalgesia

The treatment of lateral epicondylalgia, a widely-used model of musculoskeletal pain in the evaluation of many physical therapy treatments, remains somewhat of an enigma. The protagonists of a new treatment technique for lateral epicondylalgia report that it produces substantial and rapid pain relief, despite a lack of experimental evidence. A randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled repeated-measures study evaluated the initial effect of this new treatment in 24 patients with unilateral, chronic lateral epicondylalgia. Pain-free grip strength was assessed as an outcome measure before, during and after the application of the treatment, placebo and control conditions. Pressure-pain thresholds were also measured before and after the application of treatment, placebo and control conditions. The results demonstrated a significant and substantial increase in pain-free grip strength of 58% (of the order of 60 N) during treatment but not during placebo and control. In contrast, the 10% change in pressure-pain threshold after treatment, although significantly greater than placebo and control, was substantially smaller than the change demonstrated for pain-free grip strength. This effect was only present in the affected limb. The selective and specific effect of this treatment technique provides a valuable insight into the physical modulation of musculoskeletal pain and requires further investigation. (C) 2001 Harcourt Publishers Ltd.