Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25326205›Full record

ReviewDer Anaesthesist2014

[Nocebo effects and negative suggestion in anesthesia].

N Zech, M Seemann, E Hansen

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Anaesthesist, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

N ZechKlinik für Anästhesiologie, Universitätsklinikum Regensburg, 93042, Regensburg, Deutschland.
M Seemann
E Hansen
University Hospital Regensburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anesthetists have an impact on patients and healing processes not only through drugs, interventions and therapy but also significantly by their words and personality. A substantial part of observed side effects is caused by nocebo effects and negative suggestion, i.e. by the doctor and the medical surroundings. Every symptom of an illness, side effect or complication can also be induced by the wrong way of talking about it. Patients perceive medical situations, such as an emergency, anesthesia or intensive care as extreme or even as life-threatening. This can induce a natural trance, an altered state of consciousness characterized by increased suggestibility. Suggestions affect mental functions, such as anxiety and pain as well as physical functions. Strong figurative words, ambiguity, misunderstandings, incidental conversations, medical jargon and risk information are prone to generate negative suggestion. Not the informed consent per se but the way it is presented should be under scrutiny. Knowledge about nocebo effects and negative suggestion can help recognize and avoid these more easily. These negative factors depend on the context, i.e. they are strongly influenced by the individual background history and anxieties of the patient and also by the physician-patient relationship. The best protection against harm from informed consent and negative suggestion is a supportive therapeutic relationship.

Indexed as

Nocebo EffectSuggestionAnesthesiaHumansInformed ConsentPhysician-Patient RelationsQuality of Health Care

Identifiers

PMID25326205
OpenAlexW99244539

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.