TY - JOUR
T1 - The Effects of Cannabidiol and Analgesic Expectancies on Experimental Pain Reactivity in Healthy Adults
T2 - A Balanced Placebo Design Trial
AU - De Vita, Martin J.
AU - Maisto, Stephen A.
AU - Gilmour, Christina E.
AU - McGuire, Lauren
AU - Tarvin, Elizabeth
AU - Moskal, Dezarie
N1 - Funding Information:
Martin J. De Vita’s work on this project was supported by the Syracuse University Dissertation Fellowship. Stephen A. Maisto’s work on this article was supported in part by Grant 2KO5 AA16928 from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. The funding sources had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the article; and decision to submit the article for publication. The view(s) expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not reflect the official policy or position of Brooke Army Medical Center, the U.S. Army Medical Department, the U.S. Army Office of the Surgeon General, the Department of the Army, the Department of the Air Force, and Department of Defense or the U.S. Government.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 American Psychological Association
PY - 2021/4/22
Y1 - 2021/4/22
N2 - Despite its frequent use for pain relief, no experimental pain research has tested the analgesic effects of cannabidiol (CBD) in humans. The goal of this study was to experimentally test the effects of CBD and expectancies for receiving CBD on human pain reactivity. Using a crossover, 2 × 2 factorial balanced placebo design, drug administration (given inactive substance or given active CBD) and verbal instruction sets (told inactive substance or told active CBD) were experimentally manipulated. Fifteen healthy adults each completed four separate experimental sessions. Participants were randomly assigned to different counterbalanced manipulation conditions at each session: control (told inactive—given inactive); expectancy (told active CBD—given inactive); drug (told inactive—given active CBD); and expectancy + drug (told active CBD—given active CBD). Primary outcomes were pain threshold, tolerance, intensity, unpleasantness, conditioned pain modulation (CPM), and offset analgesia (OA). There was a significant main effect of instructions on OA, such that the OA response was significantly larger when participants were told that they received CBD, regardless of drug content. Pain unpleasantness was significantly reduced in the drug, expectancy, and expectancy + drug conditions, relative to the control condition. The drug and expectancy conditions separately improved CPM, whereas the expectancy + drug and control conditions produced the lowest CPM change scores. We did not detect significant effects for pain threshold, tolerance, or intensity. Our results indicated that separate pain outcomes can be differentially affected by CBD and/ or expectancies for receiving CBD. Future investigations of the psychological and pharmacological mechanisms underlying CBD analgesia are warranted.
AB - Despite its frequent use for pain relief, no experimental pain research has tested the analgesic effects of cannabidiol (CBD) in humans. The goal of this study was to experimentally test the effects of CBD and expectancies for receiving CBD on human pain reactivity. Using a crossover, 2 × 2 factorial balanced placebo design, drug administration (given inactive substance or given active CBD) and verbal instruction sets (told inactive substance or told active CBD) were experimentally manipulated. Fifteen healthy adults each completed four separate experimental sessions. Participants were randomly assigned to different counterbalanced manipulation conditions at each session: control (told inactive—given inactive); expectancy (told active CBD—given inactive); drug (told inactive—given active CBD); and expectancy + drug (told active CBD—given active CBD). Primary outcomes were pain threshold, tolerance, intensity, unpleasantness, conditioned pain modulation (CPM), and offset analgesia (OA). There was a significant main effect of instructions on OA, such that the OA response was significantly larger when participants were told that they received CBD, regardless of drug content. Pain unpleasantness was significantly reduced in the drug, expectancy, and expectancy + drug conditions, relative to the control condition. The drug and expectancy conditions separately improved CPM, whereas the expectancy + drug and control conditions produced the lowest CPM change scores. We did not detect significant effects for pain threshold, tolerance, or intensity. Our results indicated that separate pain outcomes can be differentially affected by CBD and/ or expectancies for receiving CBD. Future investigations of the psychological and pharmacological mechanisms underlying CBD analgesia are warranted.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85107915638&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85107915638&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1037/pha0000465
DO - 10.1037/pha0000465
M3 - Article
C2 - 34251840
AN - SCOPUS:85107915638
SN - 1064-1297
VL - 30
SP - 536
EP - 546
JO - Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
JF - Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
IS - 5
ER -