Delayed effects of attention on pain sensitivity and conditioned pain modulation

被引:17
|
作者
Hoegh, Morten [1 ]
Seminowicz, David A. [1 ,2 ]
Graven-Nielsen, Thomas [1 ]
机构
[1] Aalborg Univ, SMI, Ctr Neuroplast & Pain CNAP, Aalborg, Denmark
[2] Univ Maryland, Sch Dent, Ctr Adv Chron Pain Res, Dept Neural & Pain Sci, Baltimore, MD 21201 USA
基金
新加坡国家研究基金会;
关键词
COGNITIVE PERFORMANCE; CENTRAL SENSITIZATION; BOTTOM-UP; TOP-DOWN; RELIABILITY; STROOP; TASK; INHIBITION; INTERFERENCE; FIBROMYALGIA;
D O I
10.1002/ejp.1458
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Background Efficacy of pain modulation is assessed as the difference in pain sensitivity during a painful conditioning, compared to before (conditioning pain modulation, CPM). Attention can be assessed with the Stroop task, in which participants report the number of words on a screen; either congruent or incongruent with the value of the words. Attention away from painful stimuli during CPM enhances the CPM effect. However, it is unknown if attention influences CPM effects when the two are done in sequence. Methods Healthy men (n = 25) underwent cuff algometry CPM-assessment where the pressure-pain detection and tolerance thresholds (PTT) were recorded on one leg with and without contralateral conditioning. Two identical sessions of four test stimuli equal to PTT (5 s, 1-min interval, scored on a visual analogue scale, VAS) with a painful conditioning from the second to the last test-stimulus were performed. Stroop sessions were followed by test stimuli with or without painful conditioning. Results The VAS scores in the first two sessions showed excellent reliability (ICC = 0.92). VAS scores were lower in sessions with Stroop compared to sessions without Stroop (p = .05) indicating an analgesic effect of Stroop. Participants were subgrouped into CPM responders and CPM non-responders according to CPM effects in the first two sessions. CPM non-responders (n = 13) showed facilitation to repeated noxious stimuli in all sessions with no effect of conditioning or Stroop (p = .02). Conclusion Attention and CPM both modulate pain in healthy men. Attention-induced analgesia works in CPM non-responders. Results indicate that attention and CPM are not the same and that they do not demonstrate additive effects when applied in sequence. Significance Pain sensitivity is reduced after an attention task in healthy men. The delayed effects from attention only have minor effects on Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM), and results support that attention-driven analgesia works independently of CPM. Results indicate that individual strategies for pain inhibition exist and that an overlap between the mechanisms of CPM and selective attention is limited. Moreover, painful phasic stimuli may increase the number of healthy volunteers with negative CPM effects.
引用
收藏
页码:1850 / 1862
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) Effects Captured in Facial Expressions
    Kunz, Miriam
    Bunk, Stefanie F.
    Karmann, Anna J.
    Baer, Karl-Juergen
    Lautenbacher, Stefan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PAIN RESEARCH, 2021, 14 : 793 - 803
  • [22] Conditioned Pain Modulation in Children and Adolescents: Effects of Sex and Age
    Tsao, Jennie C. I.
    Seidman, Laura C.
    Evans, Subhadra
    Lung, Kirsten C.
    Zeltzer, Lonnie K.
    Naliboff, Bruce D.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2013, 14 (06): : 558 - 567
  • [23] Association of Pain Sensitization and Conditioned Pain Modulation to Pain Patterns in Knee Osteoarthritis
    Carlesso, Lisa C.
    Law, Laura Frey
    Wang, Na
    Nevitt, Michael
    Lewis, Cora E.
    Neogi, Tuhina
    [J]. ARTHRITIS CARE & RESEARCH, 2022, 74 (01) : 107 - 112
  • [24] Pain Adaptability in Individuals With Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain Is Not Associated With Conditioned Pain Modulation
    Wan, Dawn Wong Lit
    Arendt-Nielsen, Lars
    Wang, Kelun
    Xue, Charlie Changli
    Wang, Yanyi
    Zheng, Zhen
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2018, 19 (08): : 897 - 909
  • [25] Dispositional optimism is not associated with conditioned pain modulation of electric pain
    Kuhn, B.
    Palit, S.
    Lannon, E.
    Payne, M.
    Coleman, H.
    Chee, L.
    Thompson, K.
    Shadlow, J.
    Rhudy, J.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2015, 16 (04): : S50 - S50
  • [26] Impaired conditioned pain modulation in youth with functional abdominal pain
    Morris, M.
    Walker, L.
    Bruehl, S.
    Sherman, A.
    Mielock, A.
    Rao, U.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PAIN, 2016, 17 (04): : S34 - S35
  • [27] Impaired conditioned pain modulation in youth with functional abdominal pain
    Morris, Matthew C.
    Walker, Lynn S.
    Bruehl, Stephen
    Stone, Amanda L.
    Mielock, Alyssa S.
    Rao, Uma
    [J]. PAIN, 2016, 157 (10) : 2375 - 2381
  • [28] Conditioned pain modulation in patients with low back and neck pain
    Neziri, Alban Y.
    Limacher, Andreas
    Juni, Peter
    Andersen, Ole K.
    Arendt-Nielsen, Lars
    Curatolo, Michele
    [J]. SWISS MEDICAL WEEKLY, 2011, 141 : 14S - 14S
  • [29] Conditioned Pain Modulation: A Predictor for Development and Treatment of Neuropathic Pain
    Granovsky, Yelena
    [J]. CURRENT PAIN AND HEADACHE REPORTS, 2013, 17 (09)
  • [30] Conditioned pain modulation in temporomandibular disorders (TMD) pain patients
    Oono, Yuka
    Wang, Kelun
    Baad-Hansen, Lene
    Futarmal, Simple
    Kohase, Hikaru
    Svensson, Peter
    Arendt-Nielsen, Lars
    [J]. EXPERIMENTAL BRAIN RESEARCH, 2014, 232 (10) : 3111 - 3119