Attentional interference, but no attentional bias, by tonic itch and pain stimulation

Jennifer M Becker, Sarah R. Vreijling, S. Van Damme, Elisa A. Kovacs, D. Veldhuijzen, A. Lavrijsen, D. V. Van Ryckeghem, G. Crombez, A. Evers, A. V. Van Laarhoven
{"title":"Attentional interference, but no attentional bias, by tonic itch and pain stimulation","authors":"Jennifer M Becker, Sarah R. Vreijling, S. Van Damme, Elisa A. Kovacs, D. Veldhuijzen, A. Lavrijsen, D. V. Van Ryckeghem, G. Crombez, A. Evers, A. V. Van Laarhoven","doi":"10.1097/itx.0000000000000063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Attentional processes are involved in the experience of itch and pain. They interrupt task performance (ie, attentional interference) or bias allocation of attention toward the somatosensory stimulation, that is, attentional bias (AB). Research on AB toward pain is mostly focused on stimuli with short durations; hampering generalization to tonic pain sensations. Evidence for AB toward itch is lacking so far. This study investigated attentional interference by—and AB toward—experimentally induced tonic itch and pain. Methods: Fifty healthy volunteers performed a somatosensory attention task (SAT), that measured attentional interference and AB during tonic (35 s duration) pain, itch and vibrotactile stimuli. In addition, a dot-probe task measured AB toward visual representations of itch and pain, a Flanker task was used to assess attentional inhibition, and self-reported characteristics were measured. Results: Attentional interference during itch and pain stimuli compared with vibrotactile stimuli was found during the SAT. Exploration of shorter time segments within one tonic stimulus showed slowed responses for all three stimulus types during the first 5 seconds of stimulation. However, no prolonged interference in the following time segments was found. There was no AB toward somatosensory and visual stimuli. Furthermore, there was no association between any of the attentional measures and self-reported characteristics. Discussion: These findings suggest that the beginning of any somatosensory stimulus is interfering with cognitive performance, but the results for prolonged interference by itch and pain are equivocal. There was no indication for biased attention allocation. Whether this pattern is different in patients remains to be investigated in the future.","PeriodicalId":73523,"journal":{"name":"Itch (Philadelphia, Pa.)","volume":"7 1","pages":"e63 - e63"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Itch (Philadelphia, Pa.)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/itx.0000000000000063","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction: Attentional processes are involved in the experience of itch and pain. They interrupt task performance (ie, attentional interference) or bias allocation of attention toward the somatosensory stimulation, that is, attentional bias (AB). Research on AB toward pain is mostly focused on stimuli with short durations; hampering generalization to tonic pain sensations. Evidence for AB toward itch is lacking so far. This study investigated attentional interference by—and AB toward—experimentally induced tonic itch and pain. Methods: Fifty healthy volunteers performed a somatosensory attention task (SAT), that measured attentional interference and AB during tonic (35 s duration) pain, itch and vibrotactile stimuli. In addition, a dot-probe task measured AB toward visual representations of itch and pain, a Flanker task was used to assess attentional inhibition, and self-reported characteristics were measured. Results: Attentional interference during itch and pain stimuli compared with vibrotactile stimuli was found during the SAT. Exploration of shorter time segments within one tonic stimulus showed slowed responses for all three stimulus types during the first 5 seconds of stimulation. However, no prolonged interference in the following time segments was found. There was no AB toward somatosensory and visual stimuli. Furthermore, there was no association between any of the attentional measures and self-reported characteristics. Discussion: These findings suggest that the beginning of any somatosensory stimulus is interfering with cognitive performance, but the results for prolonged interference by itch and pain are equivocal. There was no indication for biased attention allocation. Whether this pattern is different in patients remains to be investigated in the future.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
注意干扰,但没有注意偏误,通过滋补痒和疼痛刺激
注意过程与瘙痒和疼痛的体验有关。它们中断任务执行(即注意干扰)或将注意力偏置到体感刺激上,即注意偏置(attention bias, AB)。对AB对疼痛的研究多集中在短时间刺激上;妨碍对强直性疼痛感觉的归纳。到目前为止,还缺乏AB对瘙痒的证据。本研究探讨了AB对实验性强直性瘙痒和疼痛的注意干扰。方法:50名健康志愿者进行体感注意任务(SAT),测量在强直性(持续35 s)疼痛、瘙痒和振动触觉刺激下的注意干扰和AB。此外,点探针任务测量了瘙痒和疼痛视觉表征的AB, Flanker任务用于评估注意抑制,并测量了自我报告的特征。结果:与振动触觉刺激相比,在SAT中发现瘙痒和疼痛刺激时的注意干扰。在一种紧张性刺激中探索较短的时间片段时,在刺激的前5秒内,所有三种刺激类型的反应都减慢。然而,在接下来的时间段里没有发现长时间的干扰。对体感和视觉刺激无AB反应。此外,任何注意力测量和自我报告的特征之间都没有关联。讨论:这些发现表明,任何体感刺激的开始都会干扰认知表现,但瘙痒和疼痛的长期干扰的结果是模棱两可的。没有迹象表明有偏向的注意力分配。这种模式在患者中是否不同还有待进一步研究。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Real-world clinical efficacy of nemolizumab in Japanese patients with atopic dermatitis Kappa opioid agonists in the treatment of itch: just scratching the surface? Oral administration of 4′-demethyl nobiletin inhibits dry skin-induced mechanical alloknesis The effect of repetitive topical applications of local anesthetics (EMLA) on experimental pain and itch (histaminergic and nonhistaminergic) Potential antipruritic neuronal targets of nalfurafine in the murine spinal dorsal horn
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1