Purpose: This study seeks to evaluate effects of expectations and conditioning on dry breath holding. Methods: Sixty healthy volunteers were subdivided into 3 groups and were tested across 4 breath holding trials. Participants of the Control group (C) did not undergo any manipulation. Participants of the placebo (P) and nocebo (N) groups were told that they would inhale O2 (actually sham O2) or CO2 (actually sham CO2) along with opposite information that this would enhance or worsen their breath holding time, respectively. Opposite conditioning paradigms based on false visual feedback were employed to reinforce participants' positive (placebo) and negative (nocebo) beliefs. Results: The P group showed the greater increase in breath holding time from baseline to the last trial (p = 0.0001) and the longest breath holding time in the last trial compared to the C group (p = 0.02) and the N group (p = 0.0001). Additionally, in the last trial the P group showed a greater decrease in peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) as compared to the C group (p = 0.04) and the N group (p = 0.001). Heart rate (HR) was accelerated in the N group during breath holding (in comparison to the P group [p = 0.04] and C group [p = 0.04]). Conclusions: Psychological components can affect behavioral and physiological parameters in breath holding. This study may inform future research about the role of placebo and nocebo effects for conditions in which critical functions are at play.
The placebo effect in breath holding: a preliminary behavioral investigation
Piedimonte, Alessandro
;Barbiani, Diletta;Benedetti, Fabrizio;Zamfira, Denisa Adina;Carlino, Elisa
2020-01-01
Abstract
Purpose: This study seeks to evaluate effects of expectations and conditioning on dry breath holding. Methods: Sixty healthy volunteers were subdivided into 3 groups and were tested across 4 breath holding trials. Participants of the Control group (C) did not undergo any manipulation. Participants of the placebo (P) and nocebo (N) groups were told that they would inhale O2 (actually sham O2) or CO2 (actually sham CO2) along with opposite information that this would enhance or worsen their breath holding time, respectively. Opposite conditioning paradigms based on false visual feedback were employed to reinforce participants' positive (placebo) and negative (nocebo) beliefs. Results: The P group showed the greater increase in breath holding time from baseline to the last trial (p = 0.0001) and the longest breath holding time in the last trial compared to the C group (p = 0.02) and the N group (p = 0.0001). Additionally, in the last trial the P group showed a greater decrease in peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) as compared to the C group (p = 0.04) and the N group (p = 0.001). Heart rate (HR) was accelerated in the N group during breath holding (in comparison to the P group [p = 0.04] and C group [p = 0.04]). Conclusions: Psychological components can affect behavioral and physiological parameters in breath holding. This study may inform future research about the role of placebo and nocebo effects for conditions in which critical functions are at play.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.