PainAAPLNCT03898141
Animal-assisted Placebo-induced Analgesia
A study testing Dog only (DO) in people with Pain and Relations, Researcher-Subject, run by University of Basel at 1 site in Switzerland.
Trial summary
An increased interest of animal-assisted interventions (AAI) can be observed within clinical practice, even though it is still not entirely clear how the presence of an animal contributes to the outcome of a treatment. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Pain, Relations, Researcher-Subject
- What is being tested?
- Dog only (DO)
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 132 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSwitzerland
- Study dates
- 27 Mar 2019to 2 Jul 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Right-handedness
Who cannot join
- Being scared of dogs or dog hair allergy by self-report
- Any acute or chronic disease (chronic pain, hypertension, heart disease, renal disease, liver disease, diabetes) as well as skin pathologies, neuropathies or nerve entrapment symptoms, sensory abnormalities affecting the tactile or thermal modality
- Current medications (psychoactive medication, narcotics, intake of analgesics) or being currently in psychological or psychiatric treatment
- Insufficient German language skills to understand the instructions
- Previous participation in studies using pain assessment with Peltier Devices
- Current or regular drug consumption (THC, cocaine, heroin, etc.)
- pregnancy
- nursing women
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Switzerland1 site
Division Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Psychology, University of Basel
Basel, Base-Stadt, 4055
About this study
Official title: Animal-assisted Placebo-induced Analgesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Healthy Participants
An increased interest of animal-assisted interventions (AAI) can be observed within clinical practice, even though it is still not entirely clear how the presence of an animal contributes to the outcome of a treatment. One theory maintains that the presence of an animal influences the relationship between health-provider and patient, which then in turn affects the outcome of the treatment. To investigate this theory, this study will combine AAI with a placebo intervention, as placebo interventions offer the basic form of intervention working through relationship and expectancy.
The effects of the presence of a dog will be assessed with a standardized experimental heat pain paradigm (TSA-II) in a randomized controlled trial in healthy participants (N=128). After a baseline measurements of heat pain threshold and tolerance, participants will be randomly assigned to one of the following four conditions: a) analgesia-expectation, no dog present, b) analgesia-expectation, dog present, c) no-expectation, no dog present and d) no-expectation, dog present.
The dog will be introduced after randomization. Expectancy will be induced by a deceptive cream which is said to helps against pain. Afterwards, posttreatment measurements will be conducted and participants fill in questionnaires about their perceptions of the experimenter.
Read the detailed description
Upon arrival, all participants will be asked to read the study information again and sign to confirm their informed consent. They will also be asked to complete the sociodemographic data (SDD) questionnaire.
During the experiment there will be three points of questionnaire-assessment. The following questionnaires will be used: expectancy will be assessed with the Expectancy of Relief Scale. Expectancy of Relief Scale is adapted to the scaling of the primary outcome. Expectancy has been measured in previous studies. It should detect if participants expectancy changes after the intervention phase. Further, it would also be interested to examine if the presence or absence of a dog has an impact on expectancy.
Furthermore, following each pain stimuli participants will be asked to complete two short questions on pain intensity and unpleasantness. Pain intensity and unpleasantness are adapted to the scaling of the primary outcome. Subjective pain intensity and unpleasantness are commonly assessed pain dimensions in heat pain paradigm studies. Intensity entails the cognitive dimensions of pain, whereas unpleasantness comprises the affective dimension of pain. Also, after each pain stimuli participants will complete the Counselor Rating Form-Short (CRF-S) to assess they perception of the experimenter.
After pain measurement, there will be a final assessment, using the credibility and effectiveness of the placebo analgesia expectation (CMQ; adapted Version of the Context Model Questionnaire), as well as the CRF-S and a short questionnaire on participants attitude towards dogs and pets (AAPL questionnaire). Study factors, dependent variables and schedule of the study are represented in Tables 1 and 2.
Before starting with the experimental procedures all participants will be introduced to the TSA-II de-vice and the study procedure. All participants will be assigned to a baseline assessment of heat tolerance and threshold. Participants will be randomized to the four experimental conditions (see below) followed by experimentally induced pain using an established and standardized heat pain paradigm: Heat stimuli will be administered to the right volar forearm using a 30x 30-mm Peltier device (Medoc, Ramatishai, Israel; TSA-II) placed at 2/3 of the distance from wrist to elbow. Heat pain threshold will be determined by the methods of limits. Temperature will be increased from the baseline (32°C) at a rate of 0.5°C /s. Participants are instructed to press the button to determine the turning point from perceiving warmth to the perception of pain. When the pain threshold has been reached, the device will resume from its baseline (32 °C) with a rise of 0.5 °C/s. This procedure will be repeated three times (Locher et al., 2017). Pain threshold will be defined as the average of the three measurements. Pain tolerance will also be determined by the method of limits: Participants will be asked to stop the increasing heat stimulus at the moment they cannot stand the heat any longer. Three measurements will start at 32 °C, with a rise of 0.5 °C/s. Heat tolerance will be defined as the average of the three measurements. Pain threshold will always be measured prior to pain tolerance in order to minimize interference between pain threshold and tolerance. After pain induction, participants will complete in the CMQ and the CRF-S questionnaires to detect how they perceive the experimenter. All instructions will be conveyed in a standardized manner to ensure that the participant-experimenter relationship is comparable in terms of friendliness and attention across all four conditions.
Experimental conditions:
- Placebo condition (PL): Participants will receive verbal information that they are receiving an analgesic cream (i.e. ""Antidolor, containing Lidocain "), which has been shown to produce significant pain reduction in previous clinical trials. However, they will receive an inert cream.
- Animal-assisted placebo condition (AAPL): Participants receive the same verbal information as in the PL condition. Additionally, they will be told that a dog will be present during the experiment to examine whether animals can be present during experimental studies or if they are too big of a distraction. Prior to the pain assessment, participants are allowed to greet the dog. The intensity of interaction will be documented and be rated on a scale from 1-5 (1=very low degree of interaction, 5=very high degree of interaction). During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to participants to avoid further physical interaction. The dog will always be lying at the same spot. Therefore, the distance between participant and dog will always be the same. However, participants will still be able to see the dog.
- Dog only condition (DO): Participants will be told that a dog will be present during the experiment to examine whether animals can be present during experimental studies or if they are too big of a distraction. Prior to the pain assessment, participants are allowed to greet the dog. The intensity of interaction will be documented and be rated on a scale from 1-5 (1=very low degree of interaction, 5=very high degree of interaction). During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to participants to avoid further physical interaction. During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to participants to avoid further physical interaction. The dog will always be lying at the same spot. Therefore, the distance between participant and dog will always be the same. However, participants will still be able to see the dog. After the introduction of the dog, participant will have the verbal information that the applied cream only moisturizes the skin to allow accurate pain measurements.
- No Dog condition (ND): Participants will participant will have the verbal information that the applied cream only moisturizes the skin to allow accurate pain measurements.
After the intervention, pain induction will then be performed for a second time (test phase) and participants complete the CMQ, CRF-S and AAPL questionnaires. Finally, participants will be fully debriefed about the real aims of the experiment (delayed informed consent). The expected study duration will be 70 minutes.
- Conditions
- Pain, Relations, Researcher-Subject
- Being tested
- Placebo (PL), Dog only (DO), Animal-assisted placebo (AAPL)
- Medical subject headings
- Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Placebo (PL)Other
Participants will get deceptive and receive an inert cream (=placebo intervention) that "reduces pain".
Dog only (DO)Other
In the dog intervention a dog will be present during the second measurements. However, participants will only learn the true aims of the presence of the dog after the study (delayed informed consent).
Animal-assisted placebo (AAPL)Other
Participants receive the placebo intervention in the presence of a dog.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Animal-assisted placebo condition (AAPL) | Experimental | Participants will receive verbal information that they are receiving an analgesic cream (i.e. ""Anti-dolor, containing Lidocain "), which has been shown to produce significant pain reduction in previous clinical trials. However, they will receive an inert cream.
Additionally, they will be told that a dog will be present during the experiment to examine whether animals can be present during experimental studies or if they are too big of a distraction. Prior to the pain assessment, participants are allowed to greet the dog. The intensity of interaction will be documented and be rated on a scale from 1-5 (1=very low degree of interaction, 5=very high de-gree of interaction). During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to participants to avoid further physical interaction. The dog will always be lying at the same spot. Therefore, the distance between participant and dog will always be the same. However, partici-pants will still be able to see the dog. Receives: Other: Animal-assisted placebo (AAPL) |
| Placebo only (PO) | Placebo comparator | Participants will receive verbal information that they are receiving an analgesic cream (i.e. ""Anti-dolor, containing Lidocain "), which has been shown to produce significant pain reduction in previous clinical trials. However, they will receive an inert cream. Receives: Other: Placebo (PL) |
| Dog only (DO) | Experimental | Participants will be told that a dog will be present during the experiment to examine whether animals can be present during experimental studies or if they are too big of a distraction. Prior to the pain assessment, participants are allowed to greet the dog. The intensity of interaction will be documented and be rated on a scale from 1-5 (1=very low degree of interaction, 5=very high degree of interaction). During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to participants to avoid further physical interaction. During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to avoid further physical interaction.
After the introduction of the dog, participant will have the verbal information that the applied cream only moisturizes the skin to allow accurate pain measurements Receives: Other: Dog only (DO) |
| No dog, no placebo (ND) | No intervention | Participants will participant will have the verbal information that the applied cream only moisturizes the skin to allow accurate pain measurements. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Heat pain tolerance assessed by TSA-II
Heat stimuli will be administered to the right volar forearm using a 30x 30-mm Peltier device (Medoc, Ramatishai, Israel; TSA-II) placed at 2/3 of the distance from wrist to elbow. Pain tolerance will be determined by the method of limits: Participants will be asked to stop the increasing heat stimulus at the moment they cannot stand the heat any longer. Three measurements will start at 32 °C, with a rise of 0.5 °C/s. Heat tolerance will be defined as the average of the three measurements.
Measured: 30 minutes
Secondary outcomes (3)
Participants perception of the experimenter I
Participants perception of the experimenter will be conducted via the KMS (Adapted version of the Context Model Questionnaire CMQ) questionnaire twice, after each pain induction phase (baseline and posttreatment).
KMF has 16 items with a scale from 1-5 (1= not at all, 5= very much, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. All items will be analyzed individual.
Measured: 15 minutes
Participants perception of the experimenter II
Participants perception of the experimenter will also be conducted via the CRF-S questionnaire (Counselor Rating Form Short) twice, after each pain induction phase (baseline and posttreatment).
CRF-S questions contains 12 items on a scale from 1-7 (1= not much, 7= very much, with a higher score indicating a better outcome. All items will be analyzed individual.
Measured: 15 minutes
Heat pain threshold assessed by TSA-II
Heat pain threshold will be determined by the methods of limits. Temperature will be increased from the baseline (32°C) at a rate of 0.5°C /s. Participants are instructed to press the button to determine the turning point from perceiving warmth to the perception of pain. When the pain threshold has been reached, the device will resume from its baseline (32 °C) with a rise of 0.5 °C/s. This procedure will be repeated three times. Pain threshold will be defined as the average of the three measurements.
Measured: 30 minutes
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted1 Apr 2019
- Study start27 Mar 2019
- Primary completion2 Jul 2019
- Study completion2 Jul 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- randomized controlled parallel group within-subjects design
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 132 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Basel
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Prof. Undine Lang, University Psychiatric Clinics (UPK), Basel, Switzerland
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr. Karin Hediger, University of Basel
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03898141
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 006-19-1
- Acronym
- AAPL
- Status last verified
- Jul 2019
- First submitted
- 25 Mar 2019
- Last updated
- 31 Jul 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: We are planning on sharing the anonymized data on a openly assess platform.
Publications
Hsieh C, Kong J, Kirsch I, Edwards RR, Jensen KB, Kaptchuk TJ, Gollub RL. Well-loved music robustly relieves pain: a randomized, controlled trial. PLoS One. 2014 Sep 11;9(9):e107390. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107390. eCollection 2014.
PubMed 25211164Locher C, Frey Nascimento A, Kirsch I, Kossowsky J, Meyer A, Gaab J. Is the rationale more important than deception? A randomized controlled trial of open-label placebo analgesia. Pain. 2017 Dec;158(12):2320-2328. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001012.
PubMed 28708766Krummenacher P, Candia V, Folkers G, Schedlowski M, Schonbachler G. Prefrontal cortex modulates placebo analgesia. Pain. 2010 Mar;148(3):368-374. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2009.09.033. Epub 2009 Oct 28.
PubMed 19875233Krummenacher P, Kossowsky J, Schwarz C, Brugger P, Kelley JM, Meyer A, Gaab J. Expectancy-induced placebo analgesia in children and the role of magical thinking. J Pain. 2014 Dec;15(12):1282-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2014.09.005. Epub 2014 Sep 23.
PubMed 25261340Hermann C, Hohmeister J, Demirakca S, Zohsel K, Flor H. Long-term alteration of pain sensitivity in school-aged children with early pain experiences. Pain. 2006 Dec 5;125(3):278-285. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2006.08.026. Epub 2006 Oct 2.
PubMed 17011707Petersen GL, Finnerup NB, Norskov KN, Grosen K, Pilegaard HK, Benedetti F, Price DD, Jensen TS, Vase L. Placebo manipulations reduce hyperalgesia in neuropathic pain. Pain. 2012 Jun;153(6):1292-1300. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2012.03.011. Epub 2012 Apr 13.
PubMed 22503337Price DD. Psychological and neural mechanisms of the affective dimension of pain. Science. 2000 Jun 9;288(5472):1769-72. doi: 10.1126/science.288.5472.1769.
PubMed 10846154Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia. 1971 Mar;9(1):97-113. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4. No abstract available.
PubMed 5146491
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 31 Jul 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Animal-assisted Placebo-induced Analgesia: A Randomized Controlled Trial in Healthy Participants
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03898141
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- AAPL / 006-19-1
- Conditions
- Pain, Relations, Researcher-Subject
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 132 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of BaselUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Prof. Undine Lang, University Psychiatric Clinics (UPK), Basel, Switzerland
- Study start
- 27 Mar 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 2 Jul 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 2 Jul 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 1 Apr 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
An increased interest of animal-assisted interventions (AAI) can be observed within clinical practice, even though it is still not entirely clear how the presence of an animal contributes to the outcome of a treatment. One theory maintains that the presence of an animal influences the relationship between health-provider and patient, which then in turn affects the outcome of the treatment. To investigate this theory, this study will combine AAI with a placebo intervention, as placebo interventions offer the basic form of intervention working through relationship and expectancy.
The effects of the presence of a dog will be assessed with a standardized experimental heat pain paradigm (TSA-II) in a randomized controlled trial in healthy participants (N=128). After a baseline measurements of heat pain threshold and tolerance, participants will be randomly assigned to one of the following four conditions: a) analgesia-expectation, no dog present, b) analgesia-expectation, dog present, c) no-expectation, no dog present and d) no-expectation, dog present.
The dog will be introduced after randomization. Expectancy will be induced by a deceptive cream which is said to helps against pain. Afterwards, posttreatment measurements will be conducted and participants fill in questionnaires about their perceptions of the experimenter.
Detailed description
Upon arrival, all participants will be asked to read the study information again and sign to confirm their informed consent. They will also be asked to complete the sociodemographic data (SDD) questionnaire.
During the experiment there will be three points of questionnaire-assessment. The following questionnaires will be used: expectancy will be assessed with the Expectancy of Relief Scale. Expectancy of Relief Scale is adapted to the scaling of the primary outcome. Expectancy has been measured in previous studies. It should detect if participants expectancy changes after the intervention phase. Further, it would also be interested to examine if the presence or absence of a dog has an impact on expectancy.
Furthermore, following each pain stimuli participants will be asked to complete two short questions on pain intensity and unpleasantness. Pain intensity and unpleasantness are adapted to the scaling of the primary outcome. Subjective pain intensity and unpleasantness are commonly assessed pain dimensions in heat pain paradigm studies. Intensity entails the cognitive dimensions of pain, whereas unpleasantness comprises the affective dimension of pain. Also, after each pain stimuli participants will complete the Counselor Rating Form-Short (CRF-S) to assess they perception of the experimenter.
After pain measurement, there will be a final assessment, using the credibility and effectiveness of the placebo analgesia expectation (CMQ; adapted Version of the Context Model Questionnaire), as well as the CRF-S and a short questionnaire on participants attitude towards dogs and pets (AAPL questionnaire). Study factors, dependent variables and schedule of the study are represented in Tables 1 and 2.
Before starting with the experimental procedures all participants will be introduced to the TSA-II de-vice and the study procedure. All participants will be assigned to a baseline assessment of heat tolerance and threshold. Participants will be randomized to the four experimental conditions (see below) followed by experimentally induced pain using an established and standardized heat pain paradigm: Heat stimuli will be administered to the right volar forearm using a 30x 30-mm Peltier device (Medoc, Ramatishai, Israel; TSA-II) placed at 2/3 of the distance from wrist to elbow. Heat pain threshold will be determined by the methods of limits. Temperature will be increased from the baseline (32°C) at a rate of 0.5°C /s. Participants are instructed to press the button to determine the turning point from perceiving warmth to the perception of pain. When the pain threshold has been reached, the device will resume from its baseline (32 °C) with a rise of 0.5 °C/s. This procedure will be repeated three times (Locher et al., 2017). Pain threshold will be defined as the average of the three measurements. Pain tolerance will also be determined by the method of limits: Participants will be asked to stop the increasing heat stimulus at the moment they cannot stand the heat any longer. Three measurements will start at 32 °C, with a rise of 0.5 °C/s. Heat tolerance will be defined as the average of the three measurements. Pain threshold will always be measured prior to pain tolerance in order to minimize interference between pain threshold and tolerance. After pain induction, participants will complete in the CMQ and the CRF-S questionnaires to detect how they perceive the experimenter. All instructions will be conveyed in a standardized manner to ensure that the participant-experimenter relationship is comparable in terms of friendliness and attention across all four conditions.
Experimental conditions:
- Placebo condition (PL): Participants will receive verbal information that they are receiving an analgesic cream (i.e. ""Antidolor, containing Lidocain "), which has been shown to produce significant pain reduction in previous clinical trials. However, they will receive an inert cream.
- Animal-assisted placebo condition (AAPL): Participants receive the same verbal information as in the PL condition. Additionally, they will be told that a dog will be present during the experiment to examine whether animals can be present during experimental studies or if they are too big of a distraction. Prior to the pain assessment, participants are allowed to greet the dog. The intensity of interaction will be documented and be rated on a scale from 1-5 (1=very low degree of interaction, 5=very high degree of interaction). During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to participants to avoid further physical interaction. The dog will always be lying at the same spot. Therefore, the distance between participant and dog will always be the same. However, participants will still be able to see the dog.
- Dog only condition (DO): Participants will be told that a dog will be present during the experiment to examine whether animals can be present during experimental studies or if they are too big of a distraction. Prior to the pain assessment, participants are allowed to greet the dog. The intensity of interaction will be documented and be rated on a scale from 1-5 (1=very low degree of interaction, 5=very high degree of interaction). During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to participants to avoid further physical interaction. During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to participants to avoid further physical interaction. The dog will always be lying at the same spot. Therefore, the distance between participant and dog will always be the same. However, participants will still be able to see the dog. After the introduction of the dog, participant will have the verbal information that the applied cream only moisturizes the skin to allow accurate pain measurements.
- No Dog condition (ND): Participants will participant will have the verbal information that the applied cream only moisturizes the skin to allow accurate pain measurements.
After the intervention, pain induction will then be performed for a second time (test phase) and participants complete the CMQ, CRF-S and AAPL questionnaires. Finally, participants will be fully debriefed about the real aims of the experiment (delayed informed consent). The expected study duration will be 70 minutes.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 4
- Model description
- randomized controlled parallel group within-subjects design
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Animal-assisted placebo condition (AAPL) | Experimental | Other: Animal-assisted placebo (AAPL)Participants will receive verbal information that they are receiving an analgesic cream (i.e. ""Anti-dolor, containing Lidocain "), which has been shown to produce significant pain reduction in previous clinical trials. However, they will receive an inert cream. Additionally, they will be told that a dog will be present during the experiment to examine whether animals can be present during experimental studies or if they are too big of a distraction. Prior to the pain assessment, participants are allowed to greet the dog. The intensity of interaction will be documented and be rated on a scale from 1-5 (1=very low degree of interaction, 5=very high de-gree of interaction). During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to participants to avoid further physical interaction. The dog will always be lying at the same spot. Therefore, the distance between participant and dog will always be the same. However, partici-pants will still be able to see the dog. |
| Placebo only (PO) | Placebo comparator | Other: Placebo (PL)Participants will receive verbal information that they are receiving an analgesic cream (i.e. ""Anti-dolor, containing Lidocain "), which has been shown to produce significant pain reduction in previous clinical trials. However, they will receive an inert cream. |
| Dog only (DO) | Experimental | Other: Dog only (DO)Participants will be told that a dog will be present during the experiment to examine whether animals can be present during experimental studies or if they are too big of a distraction. Prior to the pain assessment, participants are allowed to greet the dog. The intensity of interaction will be documented and be rated on a scale from 1-5 (1=very low degree of interaction, 5=very high degree of interaction). During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to participants to avoid further physical interaction. During the experiment the dog will be lying in the room with some distance to avoid further physical interaction. After the introduction of the dog, participant will have the verbal information that the applied cream only moisturizes the skin to allow accurate pain measurements |
| No dog, no placebo (ND) | No intervention | –Participants will participant will have the verbal information that the applied cream only moisturizes the skin to allow accurate pain measurements. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Age ≥ 18 years
- Right-handedness
Key exclusion criteria (8 listed)
- Being scared of dogs or dog hair allergy by self-report
- Any acute or chronic disease (chronic pain, hypertension, heart disease, renal disease, liver disease, diabetes) as well as skin pathologies, neuropathies or nerve entrapment symptoms, sensory abnormalities affecting the tactile or thermal modality
- Current medications (psychoactive medication, narcotics, intake of analgesics) or being currently in psychological or psychiatric treatment
- Insufficient German language skills to understand the instructions
- Previous participation in studies using pain assessment with Peltier Devices
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Placebo (PL)Participants will get deceptive and receive an inert cream (=placebo intervention) that "reduces pain". | Other | Placebo only (PO) |
| Dog only (DO)In the dog intervention a dog will be present during the second measurements. However, participants will only learn the true aims of the presence of the dog after the study (delayed informed consent). | Other | Dog only (DO) |
| Animal-assisted placebo (AAPL)Participants receive the placebo intervention in the presence of a dog. | Other | Animal-assisted placebo condition (AAPL) |
Primary outcome
Heat pain tolerance assessed by TSA-II
Time frame: 30 minutes
Heat stimuli will be administered to the right volar forearm using a 30x 30-mm Peltier device (Medoc, Ramatishai, Israel; TSA-II) placed at 2/3 of the distance from wrist to elbow. Pain tolerance will be determined by the method of limits: Participants will be asked to stop the increasing heat stimulus at the moment they cannot stand the heat any longer. Three measurements will start at 32 °C, with a rise of 0.5 °C/s. Heat tolerance will be defined as the average of the three measurements.
3 secondary outcomes
Participants perception of the experimenter I
Time frame: 15 minutes
Participants perception of the experimenter II
Time frame: 15 minutes
Heat pain threshold assessed by TSA-II
Time frame: 30 minutes
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 31 Jul 2019.
- Background: PubMed 25211164Hsieh C, Kong J, Kirsch I, Edwards RR, Jensen KB, Kaptchuk TJ, Gollub RL. Well-loved music robustly relieves pain: a randomized, controlled trial. PLoS One. 2014 Sep 11;9(9):e107390. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0107390. eCollection 2014.
- Background: PubMed 28708766Locher C, Frey Nascimento A, Kirsch I, Kossowsky J, Meyer A, Gaab J. Is the rationale more important than deception? A randomized controlled trial of open-label placebo analgesia. Pain. 2017 Dec;158(12):2320-2328. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000001012.
- Background: PubMed 19875233Krummenacher P, Candia V, Folkers G, Schedlowski M, Schonbachler G. Prefrontal cortex modulates placebo analgesia. Pain. 2010 Mar;148(3):368-374. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2009.09.033. Epub 2009 Oct 28.
- Background: PubMed 25261340Krummenacher P, Kossowsky J, Schwarz C, Brugger P, Kelley JM, Meyer A, Gaab J. Expectancy-induced placebo analgesia in children and the role of magical thinking. J Pain. 2014 Dec;15(12):1282-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jpain.2014.09.005. Epub 2014 Sep 23.
- Background: PubMed 17011707Hermann C, Hohmeister J, Demirakca S, Zohsel K, Flor H. Long-term alteration of pain sensitivity in school-aged children with early pain experiences. Pain. 2006 Dec 5;125(3):278-285. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2006.08.026. Epub 2006 Oct 2.
- Background: PubMed 22503337Petersen GL, Finnerup NB, Norskov KN, Grosen K, Pilegaard HK, Benedetti F, Price DD, Jensen TS, Vase L. Placebo manipulations reduce hyperalgesia in neuropathic pain. Pain. 2012 Jun;153(6):1292-1300. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2012.03.011. Epub 2012 Apr 13.
- Background: PubMed 10846154Price DD. Psychological and neural mechanisms of the affective dimension of pain. Science. 2000 Jun 9;288(5472):1769-72. doi: 10.1126/science.288.5472.1769.
- Background: PubMed 5146491Oldfield RC. The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia. 1971 Mar;9(1):97-113. doi: 10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4. No abstract available.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. We are planning on sharing the anonymized data on a openly assess platform.
Related trials for Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effect of Stress Ball Use During Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal After Coronary Angiography
Femoral Arterial Sheath Removal, Stress Ball
Recruiting
Empowered Relief® for Cancer Survivors With Chronic Pain
Chronic Pain Due to Cancer, Pain Catastrophizing
RecruitingPhase 4
ESP Blocks for Posterior Spinal Fusion
Postoperative Pain
RecruitingObservational study
Pain Phenotypes in Individuals With Multiple Sclerosis
Multiple Sclerosis, Chronic Pain
Not yet recruiting
Effects of Hip Hinge Exercises on Pain, Range of Motion and Functional Disability in Non-specific Low Back Pain.
Low Back Pain
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Dog only (DO) in people with Pain and Relations, Researcher-Subject, run by University of Basel at 1 site in Switzerland.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 2 inclusion and 8 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 31 Jul 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Switzerland. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Heat pain tolerance assessed by TSA-II (time frame: 30 minutes). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03898141, which also lists 8 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 31 Jul 2019.