Skip to main content

STUDY PROTOCOL article

Front. Psychol.
Sec. Psychology for Clinical Settings
Volume 16 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1521978
This article is part of the Research Topic Optimizing the Therapeutic Potential in Clinical Settings: Leveraging Placebos and Mitigating Nocebo Effects View all 4 articles

Optimized communication during risk disclosure to reduce nocebo headache after lumbar puncture -a study protocol for a randomized controlled clinical trial

Provisionally accepted
  • 1 Department of Neurology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany
  • 2 Center for Translational Neuro- and Behavioral Sciences, Essen University Hospital, Essen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • 3 Institute of Medical Psychology and Behavioral Immunobiology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Risk communication has been found to be a driver of nocebo effects in medical settings by enhancing negative expectations. In fact, merely disclosing the risk of side effects and complications of treatments or medical procedures increases reports of adverse events. Along these lines, it has been proposed that the occurrence of headache after lumbar puncture (LP), a routine diagnostic procedure in neurology, is caused to a large degree by the information delivered by the physician during the informed consent procedure. As withholding information conflicts with principles of patient autonomy, strategies are needed to mitigate noceboassociated headache without omitting the disclosure of risks. Here, we present a detailed study protocol for a preregistered, prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled clinical trial with N = 80 inpatients at the neurology department of the University Hospital Essen who have an indication for a diagnostic LP. The trial is designed to test whether optimized communication strategies aimed at minimizing nocebo effects during the informed consent procedure reduce headache-related impairment after LP compared to standard of care. Secondary outcomes include expectation of side effects, state anxiety, headache intensity and duration, use of on-demand pain medication, perceived warmth and competence of the physician, and satisfaction with the procedure. the ICP and LP, she had been a resident in neurology for 3.5 years and was 30 years old. She is White and speaks German as her native language.

    Keywords: Nocebo, expectation, study protocol, Lumbar Puncture, Headache, Communication, Informed Consent, side effect

    Received: 03 Nov 2024; Accepted: 20 Jan 2025.

    Copyright: © 2025 Asan, Gronen, Peters, Kleinschnitz, Holle-Lee, Benson and Bingel. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence: Livia Asan, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.