Do people with acute low back pain have an attentional bias to threat-related words?

被引:1
|
作者
Skinner, Ian [3 ,4 ,5 ]
Hubscher, Markus [4 ,5 ]
Lee, Hopin [4 ,6 ,7 ]
Traeger, Adrian C. [4 ,5 ,8 ]
Moseley, G. Lorimer [4 ,9 ]
Wand, Benedict M. [10 ]
Gustin, Sylvia M. [4 ,11 ]
McAuley, James H. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Neurosci Res Australia, POB 1165, Randwick, NSW 2031, Australia
[2] Univ New South Wales, Sch Hlth Sci, Fac Med, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[3] Charles Sturt Univ, Sch Community Hlth, Port Macquarie, NSW, Australia
[4] Neurosci Res Australia, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[5] Univ New South Wales, Prince Wales Clin Sch, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[6] Univ Newcastle, Sch Med & Publ Hlth, Newcastle, NSW, Australia
[7] Univ Oxford, Nuffield Dept Orthopaed Rheumatol & Musculoskelet, Rehabil Res Ctr, Ctr Stat Med, Oxford, England
[8] Univ Sydney, Sch Publ Hlth, Fac Med & Hlth, Sydney, NSW, Australia
[9] Univ South Australia, IIMPACT Hlth, Adelaide, SA, Australia
[10] Univ Notre Dame Australia, Sch Physiotherapy, Fremantle, WA, Australia
[11] Univ New South Wales, Sch Psychol, Sydney, NSW, Australia
基金
澳大利亚国家健康与医学研究理事会; 英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
attention; attentional bias; back pain; eye tracking; pain; reliability; RELIABILITY; UNRELIABILITY; SENSITIVITY; MOVEMENTS; IMPLICIT; STIMULI; ANXIETY; ERROR;
D O I
10.1515/sjpain-2020-0014
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: It has been hypothesised that attentional bias to environmental threats can contribute to persistent pain. It is unclear whether people with acute low back pain (LBP) have an attentional bias to environmental threats. We investigated if attentional bias of threat related words is different in people with acute LBP and pain-free controls. Methods: People with acute LBP and pain-free people completed a free viewing eye tracking task. Participants were simultaneously presented with two words, a threat related word and a neutral control word. Threat related words were general threat, affective pain and sensory pain. We conducted linear mixed models to detect differences between acute LBP and pain-free participants on five eye tracking outcome measures (dwell time, first fixation, latency to first fixation, first run dwell time and number of fixations). We calculated absolute reliability, (standard error of measure), and relative reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients [ICC 2,1]) for each eye tracking outcome measures. Results: We recruited 65 people with acute LBP and 65 pain-free controls. Participants with acute LBP had a higher proportion of fixations towards the affective pain words (M=0.5009, 95% CI=0.4941, 0.5076) than the pain-free controls had (M=0.4908, 95% CI=0.4836, 0.4979), mean between group difference = -0.0101, 95% CI [-0.0198, -0.0004], p=0.0422. There was no difference between acute LBP and pain-free controls for the remaining eye tracking outcome measures (all p>0.05). The only outcome measure that had an ICC of more than 0.7 was the latency to first fixation (affective pain words ICC=0.73, general threat words ICC=0.72). Conclusions: When compared with pain-free controls, people with acute LBP looked more often at affective pain words relative to neutral control words. This may indicate a form of engagement bias for people with acute LBP. Attentional bias was not consistent across outcome measures or word groups. Further research is needed to investigate the potential role of attentional bias in the development of persistent pain.
引用
收藏
页码:485 / 494
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Threat-related attentional bias in anxiety
    Slagter, Heleen A.
    Kelly, Bridget J.
    Shackman, Alexander J.
    Davidson, Richard J.
    [J]. PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY, 2007, 44 : S87 - S87
  • [2] Observational learning of threat-related attentional bias
    Gregoire, Laurent
    Dubravac, Mirela
    Moore, Kirsten
    Kim, Namgyun
    Anderson, Brian A.
    [J]. COGNITION & EMOTION, 2024, 38 (05) : 789 - 800
  • [3] A computational account of threat-related attentional bias
    Wise, Toby
    Michely, Jochen
    Dayan, Peter
    Dolan, Raymond J.
    [J]. PLOS COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY, 2019, 15 (10) : e1007341
  • [4] Threat-Related Attentional Bias in Anorexia Nervosa
    Schober, Ilka
    Renwick, Beth
    de Jong, Hannah
    Kenyon, Martha
    Sharpe, Helen
    Jacobi, Corinna
    Schmidt, Ulrike
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF EATING DISORDERS, 2014, 47 (02) : 168 - 173
  • [5] The Computational Basis of Threat-Related Attentional Bias
    Wise, Toby
    Michely, Jochen
    Dayan, Peter
    Dolan, Ray
    [J]. BIOLOGICAL PSYCHIATRY, 2018, 83 (09) : S240 - S240
  • [6] Acute Psychological Stress Disrupts Attentional Bias to Threat-Related Stimuli
    Jiang, Caihong
    Buchanan, Tony W.
    Yao, Zhuxi
    Zhang, Kan
    Wu, Jianhui
    Zhang, Liang
    [J]. SCIENTIFIC REPORTS, 2017, 7
  • [7] Acute Psychological Stress Disrupts Attentional Bias to Threat-Related Stimuli
    Caihong Jiang
    Tony W. Buchanan
    Zhuxi Yao
    Kan Zhang
    Jianhui Wu
    Liang Zhang
    [J]. Scientific Reports, 7
  • [8] Threat-Related Attentional Bias in Anxious Youth: A Review
    Anthony C. Puliafico
    Philip C. Kendall
    [J]. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 2006, 9 : 162 - 180
  • [9] Threat-related attentional bias in anxious youth: A review
    Puliafico, Anthony C.
    Kendall, Philip C.
    [J]. CLINICAL CHILD AND FAMILY PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2006, 9 (3-4) : 162 - 180
  • [10] Publisher Correction: Acute Psychological Stress Disrupts Attentional Bias to Threat-Related Stimuli
    Caihong Jiang
    Tony W. Buchanan
    Zhuxi Yao
    Kan Zhang
    Jianhui Wu
    Liang Zhang
    [J]. Scientific Reports, 8