Amber Billens , Sophie Van Oosterwijck , Evy Dhondt , Mira Meeus , Indra De Greef , Stefaan Van Damme , Jessica Van Oosterwijck
{"title":"The influence of expectations and attention on conditioned pain modulation: A systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Amber Billens , Sophie Van Oosterwijck , Evy Dhondt , Mira Meeus , Indra De Greef , Stefaan Van Damme , Jessica Van Oosterwijck","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is a psychophysical experimental measure of endogenous pain inhibition in humans. Within this paradigm, one noxious stimulus, the conditioning stimulus (CS), reduces the pain perception from another heterotopic noxious stimulus, the test stimulus (TS). Cognitive processes are known to influence pain perception and might impact the underlying mechanisms of CPM. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizes the existing scientific literature addressing the influence of cognitive factors, namely, expectations and attention on CPM. Four electronic databases were searched to identify relevant literature. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed according to two modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scales and the GRADE approach, respectively. Twenty-four articles were included. Qualitative analysis showed more efficient CPM when pain relief is expected, and an association between intrinsic attention to pain and reduced CPM. Although the evidence is not unanimous, meta-analyses showed that CPM is more efficient when attention is directed towards the CS versus the TS, and is not influenced by distraction. In conclusion, while CPM seems robust to attentional distraction, expectations and attentional focus appear to influence CPM. However, the evidence is limited and conflicting and warrants further study in order to prevent cognitive confounding and enhance mechanistic understanding.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"114 ","pages":"Article 102517"},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272735824001387","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is a psychophysical experimental measure of endogenous pain inhibition in humans. Within this paradigm, one noxious stimulus, the conditioning stimulus (CS), reduces the pain perception from another heterotopic noxious stimulus, the test stimulus (TS). Cognitive processes are known to influence pain perception and might impact the underlying mechanisms of CPM. This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesizes the existing scientific literature addressing the influence of cognitive factors, namely, expectations and attention on CPM. Four electronic databases were searched to identify relevant literature. Risk of bias and quality of evidence were assessed according to two modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scales and the GRADE approach, respectively. Twenty-four articles were included. Qualitative analysis showed more efficient CPM when pain relief is expected, and an association between intrinsic attention to pain and reduced CPM. Although the evidence is not unanimous, meta-analyses showed that CPM is more efficient when attention is directed towards the CS versus the TS, and is not influenced by distraction. In conclusion, while CPM seems robust to attentional distraction, expectations and attentional focus appear to influence CPM. However, the evidence is limited and conflicting and warrants further study in order to prevent cognitive confounding and enhance mechanistic understanding.
期刊介绍:
Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology.
While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.