TY - JOUR
T1 - Blinding and sham control methods in trials of physical, psychological, and self-management interventions for pain (article II)
T2 - a meta-analysis relating methods to trial results
AU - Hohenschurz-Schmidt, David
AU - Draper-Rodi, Jerry
AU - Vase, Lene
AU - Scott, Whitney
AU - McGregor, Alison
AU - Soliman, Nadia
AU - MacMillan, Andrew
AU - Olivier, Axel
AU - Cherian, Cybill Ann
AU - Corcoran, Daniel
AU - Abbey, Hilary
AU - Freigang, Sascha
AU - Chan, Jessica
AU - Phalip, Jules
AU - Sørensen, Lea Nørgaard
AU - Delafin, Maite
AU - Baptista, Margarida
AU - Medforth, Naomi R.
AU - Ruffini, Nuria
AU - Andresen, Stephanie Skøtt
AU - Ytier, Sylvain
AU - Ali, Dorota
AU - Hobday, Harriet
AU - Ngurah Agung Adhiyoga Santosa, Anak Agung
AU - Vollert, Jan
AU - Rice, Andrew S.C.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2023 Lippincott Williams and Wilkins. All rights reserved.
PY - 2023/3/1
Y1 - 2023/3/1
N2 - Sham interventions in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of physical, psychological, and self-management (PPS) therapies for pain are highly variable in design and believed to contribute to poor internal validity. However, it has not been formally tested whether the extent to which sham controls resemble the treatment under investigation consistently affects trial outcomes, such as effect sizes, differential attrition, participant expectancy, and blinding effectiveness. Placebo- or sham-controlled RCTs of PPS interventions of clinical pain populations were searched in 12 databases. The similarity of control interventions to the experimental treatment was rated across 25 features. Meta-regression analyses assessed putative links between employed control interventions, observed effect sizes in pain-related outcomes, attrition, and blinding success. The sample included 198 unique control interventions, dominated by manual therapy and chronic musculoskeletal pain research. Meta-analyses indicated small-to-moderate benefits of active treatments over control interventions, across subgroups of manual therapies, exercise, and rehabilitation, and psychological intervention trials. Multiple meta-regression modelling demonstrated that similarity between sham control and tested interventions predicted variability in pain-related outcomes, attrition, and blinding effectiveness. Influential variables were differences relating to the extent of intervention exposure, participant experience, and treatment environments. The results support the supposed link between blinding methods and effect sizes, based on a large and systematically sourced overview of methods. However, challenges to effective blinding are complex and often difficult to discern from trial reports. Nonetheless, these insights have the potential to change trial design, conduct, and reporting and will inform guideline development.
AB - Sham interventions in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of physical, psychological, and self-management (PPS) therapies for pain are highly variable in design and believed to contribute to poor internal validity. However, it has not been formally tested whether the extent to which sham controls resemble the treatment under investigation consistently affects trial outcomes, such as effect sizes, differential attrition, participant expectancy, and blinding effectiveness. Placebo- or sham-controlled RCTs of PPS interventions of clinical pain populations were searched in 12 databases. The similarity of control interventions to the experimental treatment was rated across 25 features. Meta-regression analyses assessed putative links between employed control interventions, observed effect sizes in pain-related outcomes, attrition, and blinding success. The sample included 198 unique control interventions, dominated by manual therapy and chronic musculoskeletal pain research. Meta-analyses indicated small-to-moderate benefits of active treatments over control interventions, across subgroups of manual therapies, exercise, and rehabilitation, and psychological intervention trials. Multiple meta-regression modelling demonstrated that similarity between sham control and tested interventions predicted variability in pain-related outcomes, attrition, and blinding effectiveness. Influential variables were differences relating to the extent of intervention exposure, participant experience, and treatment environments. The results support the supposed link between blinding methods and effect sizes, based on a large and systematically sourced overview of methods. However, challenges to effective blinding are complex and often difficult to discern from trial reports. Nonetheless, these insights have the potential to change trial design, conduct, and reporting and will inform guideline development.
KW - Control groups
KW - Meta-analysis
KW - Physical therapy modalities
KW - Placebo effect
KW - Placebos
KW - Psychotherapy
KW - Randomized controlled trials
KW - Rehabilitation
KW - Systematic review
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85147894820&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002730
DO - 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000002730
M3 - Review article
C2 - 36271798
AN - SCOPUS:85147894820
SN - 0304-3959
VL - 164
SP - 509
EP - 533
JO - Pain
JF - Pain
IS - 3
ER -