Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) Paradigms: Reliability and Relationship With Individual Characteristics.

IF 1.6 4区医学 Q2 NURSING Pain Management Nursing Pub Date : 2024-12-31 DOI:10.1016/j.pmn.2024.12.001

Antonio Gil-Ugidos, Lara Rubal-Otero, Alberto González-Villar, María Teresa Carrillo-De-la-Peña

{"title":"Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) Paradigms: Reliability and Relationship With Individual Characteristics.","authors":"Antonio Gil-Ugidos, Lara Rubal-Otero, Alberto González-Villar, María Teresa Carrillo-De-la-Peña","doi":"10.1016/j.pmn.2024.12.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) is a useful tool for testing the functionality of endogenous pain modulation. However, inconsistent results have been obtained in clinical populations, possibly due to the wide variety of CPM protocols used and the influence of demographic and psychological characteristics of the individuals assessed.Methods: We tested the sensitivity and reliability of four commonly used CPM paradigms in a sample of 58 healthy participants. We also checked how these measures were related to Temporal Summation of Second Pain (TSSP), sociodemographic (age and sex) and psychological variables (anxiety and stress).Results: CPM results were influenced by the test stimulus used, with tests using pain pressure threshold (PPT) obtaining a greater number of responders (over 65%) and being the most sensitive (higher size effect: Cohen's d > 0.5). However, all measures showed excellent intrasession reliability, with strong agreement between the CPM magnitudes. CPM indices were not correlated with TSSP, age or sex, and the psychological scales did not differentiate CPM responders and non-responders.Conclusions: Although the CPM indices showed good reliability, construction of a large database with standardized values for healthy individuals seems necessary for the use of CPM in clinical settings.","PeriodicalId":19959,"journal":{"name":"Pain Management Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Management Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmn.2024.12.001","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) is a useful tool for testing the functionality of endogenous pain modulation. However, inconsistent results have been obtained in clinical populations, possibly due to the wide variety of CPM protocols used and the influence of demographic and psychological characteristics of the individuals assessed.

Methods: We tested the sensitivity and reliability of four commonly used CPM paradigms in a sample of 58 healthy participants. We also checked how these measures were related to Temporal Summation of Second Pain (TSSP), sociodemographic (age and sex) and psychological variables (anxiety and stress).

Results: CPM results were influenced by the test stimulus used, with tests using pain pressure threshold (PPT) obtaining a greater number of responders (over 65%) and being the most sensitive (higher size effect: Cohen's d > 0.5). However, all measures showed excellent intrasession reliability, with strong agreement between the CPM magnitudes. CPM indices were not correlated with TSSP, age or sex, and the psychological scales did not differentiate CPM responders and non-responders.

Conclusions: Although the CPM indices showed good reliability, construction of a large database with standardized values for healthy individuals seems necessary for the use of CPM in clinical settings.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

条件疼痛调节（CPM）范式：信度与个体特征的关系。

目的：条件疼痛调节（CPM）是测试内源性疼痛调节功能的有用工具。然而，在临床人群中获得了不一致的结果，这可能是由于所使用的CPM方案种类繁多，以及受评估个体的人口统计学和心理特征的影响。方法：在58名健康被试中，对四种常用CPM范式进行敏感性和信度检验。我们还检查了这些措施与第二次疼痛时间总和（TSSP）、社会人口学（年龄和性别）和心理变量（焦虑和压力）的关系。结果：CPM结果受测试刺激的影响，使用疼痛压力阈值（PPT）的测试获得更多的反应（超过65%），并且最敏感（更高大小效应：Cohen's d > 0.5）。然而，所有的测量都显示出良好的行业内可靠性，CPM数值之间具有很强的一致性。CPM指数与TSSP、年龄和性别无关，心理量表对CPM反应者和无反应者没有区分。结论：虽然CPM指标显示出良好的可靠性，但在临床环境中使用CPM似乎有必要建立一个具有健康个体标准化值的大型数据库。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Pain Management Nursing 医学-护理

CiteScore

3.00

自引率

5.90%

发文量

187

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： This peer-reviewed journal offers a unique focus on the realm of pain management as it applies to nursing. Original and review articles from experts in the field offer key insights in the areas of clinical practice, advocacy, education, administration, and research. Additional features include practice guidelines and pharmacology updates.