Scandinavian Journal of Pain最新文献

Objectives: Existing equipment for quantitative sensory testing is generally expensive and not easily applicable in a clinical setting thus simple bed-side devices are warranted. Pressure hyperalgesia is a common finding in patients with musculoskeletal pain and an experimental model is delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS). DOMS is characterised by muscle hyperalgesia and some studies report facilitation of temporal summation of pain. This study aimed to detect DOMS induced muscle hyperalgesia and temporal summation of pain using a newly developed bed-side quantitative sensory testing device to deliver standardised pressure.

Methods: Twenty-two healthy participants participated in two sessions with the second session approximately 48 h after baseline. Pressure pain intensities were assessed from the gastrocnemius muscle with four probes calibrated to apply 2, 4, 6 and 8 kg, respectively. Temporal summation of pain (10 stimuli delivered at 0.5 Hz using the 6 kg probe) intensities were assessed from the same location. DOMS was evoked in the gastrocnemius muscle by an eccentric exercise. Sleepiness and physical activity were measured with the Epworth Sleepiness Scale and the Global Physical Activity Questionnaire to investigate if they were associated with the quantitative sensory testing measures.

Results: Pressure pain intensity was significantly increased 48 h after induction of DOMS when compared to baseline for all four probes (p<0.05). Temporal summation of pain was not statistically significant affected by DOMS and sleep quality and physical activity did not associate with any of the measures.

Conclusions: This study introduces a simple, bed-side assessment tool for the assessment of pressure pain intensity and hence hyperalgesia and temporal summation of pain.

Objectives: Comorbid with chronic pain are negative emotions, anger being particularly salient. To evaluate specific relationships between pain and anger, the present study deconstructed anger into five parameters and dichotomized pain into sensory vs. affective components. Hypotheses were (i) anger parameters would be significantly and positively correlated with affective pain more so than with sensory pain, and (ii) individual parameters would be differentially related to pain components.

Methods: The Anger Parameters Scale (APS) was used to rate five parameters of anger: frequency, duration, intensity, latency, and threshold. Also rated was the physical sensation of pain and the degree of distress from pain. The volunteer sample comprised n=51 chronic pain patients, varying in ethnicity/race and educational level.

Results: Descriptive statistics revealed: APS total M=71.52, SD=16.68, Sensory pain M=6.27, SD=2.15, Affective pain M=5.76, SD=2.28. Sensory and affective pain were highly correlated, r=0.70. APS total was significantly associated with affective pain (r=+0.28) but hardly with sensory pain (r=0.12). Two anger parameters significantly correlated with affective pain: anger frequency (r=+0.30, p<0.05) and anger threshold (r=+0.33, p<0.05). Secondarily, certain educational levels (but not gender and ethnicity/race) were associated with significantly higher APS total scores.

Conclusions: Scores for all variables were in the mid-range. As hypothesized, anger was more strongly correlated with distress/suffering of pain than with physical sensation of pain, though both pain components were closely coupled. Specific findings regarding frequency and threshold imply that being angry often and being oversensitive to provocation are associated with greater distress in this context. In deconstructing anger and dichotomizing pain, the present study extends previous research by elaborating on what aspects of anger are most related to which components of pain. Moreover, certain educational levels with higher levels of anger may need special attention. Further research could examine if treatment of anger might lead to corresponding changes in chronic pain.

Objectives: Although neurobiological research has shown that interoception plays a role in the perception of pain and its chronification, the relationship between interoceptive sensitivity and pain has not been definitively confirmed by clinical studies. The aim of this study was therefore to better understand the relationship between interoceptive sensitivity, somatization, and clinical pain, and to identify any differences in the interoceptive sensitivity of patients with recurrent vs. chronic pain.

Methods: Scores from 43 Chronic pain subjects, assessed using ICD-11 Criteria; 42 healthy subjects (without pain or psychiatric disorders); and 38 recurrent pain subjects on the Multidimensional Assessment of Interoceptive Awareness (MAIA), Body Perception Questionnaire (BPQ-SF), Somatosensory amplification scale (SSAS), Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-15), Symptom Checklist-Revised (SCL-90-R), and Italian Pain Questionnaire (IPQ) were compared.

Results: Negative attention to the body was indicated by higher scores of psychosomatic dimensions as SSAS, SCL90R somatization, and PHQ-15 in recurrent, but especially chronic pain (p<0.000 for all). An increase in psychosomatic dimension scores (i.e., somatization, somatosensory amplification) was associated with an increase in both autonomic nervous system reactivity (ANSR) dimension scores and the negative influence of the Not-worrying, attention regulation and trusting of the MAIA. In contrast, the presence of pain and scores for its dimensions with associated with lower supra-diaphragmatic activity as per the BPQ.

Conclusions: Pain chronification might depend on both the impairment of interoceptive sensitivity and an increase on psychosomatic dimensions via modification of ANSR hyperactivity and a reduction of the MAIA Not-worrying dimension.

Objectives: Previous research on stress-induced pain modulation suggests that moderate psychological stress usually leads to hyperalgesia while more severe threat results in hypoalgesia. However, existing studies often lack suitable control conditions imperative to identify mere stress effects. Similarly, research mainly focused on pure anticipation of a social threat, not taking into consideration actual experiences of social evaluation. Therefore, we set out to investigate actual social up- and downgrading combined with a standardized stress paradigm to evaluate short-term and prolonged changes in pain perception and their potential association with neuroendocrine and subjective stress parameters.

Methods: We allocated 177 healthy women to four experimental conditions, either the standard version of the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) followed by positive, negative or no performance feedback, or a well-matched but less demanding placebo version of the TSST. Stress responses were assessed with ratings, salivary alpha-amylase, and salivary cortisol. To capture putative effects of stress on pain, heat pain threshold, ratings of phasic heat pain stimuli, and conditioned pain modulation were measured.

Results: Despite a largely successful stress induction, results do not support a reliable influence of experimentally induced social stress-with or without subsequent performance feedback-on pain in women. Further, we found no clear association of pain modulation and changes in neuroendocrine or subjective stress responses.

Conclusions: Our results contrast previous studies, which repeatedly demonstrated stress-induced hypo- or hyperalgesia. This might be due to methodological reasons as former research was often characterized by high heterogeneity regarding the applied stressors, low sample sizes, and lacking or inconclusive control conditions. Thus, our results raise the question whether pain modulation in women by experimental psychosocial stress might have been overestimated in the past. Future research is necessary, which should employ parametric stress induction methods including well-matched control tasks, taking into consideration the participants' gender/sex and the time course of the stress response relative to pain assessment. The study is registered as DRKS00026946 at 'Deutsches Register Klinischer Studien' (DRKS) and can be also found at the World Health Organization's search portal.

Objectives: Patients suffering from chronic pain experience significant disability and disease burden. Resilience has been understood to be a protective factor in face of adversity, eventually contributing to positive outcomes. As such, the current review sought to summarize the existing literature focusing on the roles of resilience in relation to pain phenomenology, pain outcomes (including function and mental health), amongst relevant clinical correlates in a bid to promote holistic management of debilitating chronic pain conditions from a resilience-oriented psychotherapeutic approach as an adjunct to pharmacological treatment.

Methods: A scoping review was conducted on empirical studies surrounding the theme of resilience in adult chronic pain populations published before 9th May 2021. The following main inclusion criteria was applied; (a) adults diagnosed with chronic pain disorders, (b) use of quantifiable pain measures, (c) use of quantifiable resilience measures. A total of 32 studies were then selected for the review.

Results: First, higher levels of resilience were associated with a reduced likelihood of experiencing any chronic pain, fewer pain sites, better psychological response towards nociception and reduced need for analgesia. Second, higher levels of resilience correlated with better daily and physical function, quality of life, psychosocial functioning and lower likelihood of co-morbid mental health disorders. Third, resilience was an intermediary variable in the pathways from pain phenomenology leading to pain interference, depression and post-traumatic growth.

Conclusions: The findings were contextualized using pain-disability and resilience frameworks (The Pain and Disability Drivers Model, O'Leary's Resilience models) with suggestions to enhance resilience and contextual factors in the holistic management of adult chronic pain conditions. Future research should examine the differences in resilience between pain types as well as evaluate the efficacy of streamlined resilience-oriented interventions.

Objectives: Patient and stakeholder engagements in research have increasingly gained attention in healthcare and healthcare-related research. A common and rigorous approach to establish research priorities based on input from people and stakeholders is the James Lind Alliance Priority Setting Partnership (JLA-PSP). The aim of this study was to establish research priorities for chronic musculoskeletal (MSK) pain by engaging with people living with chronic MSK pain, relatives to people living with chronic MSK pain, healthcare professionals (HCP), and researchers working with chronic MSK pain.

Methods: This JLA-PSP included a nation-wide survey in Denmark, an interim prioritisation, and an online consensus building workshop. The information gained from this was the basis for developing the final list of specific research priorities within chronic MSK pain.

Results: In the initial survey, 1010 respondents (91% people living with chronic MSK pain/relatives, 9% HCPs/researchers) submitted 3121 potential questions. These were summarised into 19 main themes and 36 sub-themes. In the interim prioritisation exercise, 51% people living with pain/relatives and 49% HCPs/researchers reduced the list to 33 research questions prior to the final priority setting workshop. 23 participants attended the online workshop (12 people/relatives, 10 HCPs, and 1 researcher) who reached consensus for the most important research priorities after two rounds of discussion of each question.

Conclusions: This study identified several specific research questions generated by people living with chronic MSK pain, relatives, HCPs, and researchers. The stakeholders proposed prioritization of the healthcare system's ability to support patients, focus on developing coherent pathways between sectors and education for both patients and HCP. These research questions can form the basis for future studies, funders, and be used to align research with end-users' priorities.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine how the "wait-and-see" recommendation affects adolescents' understanding of their illness and symptoms and their care-seeking behavior.

Methods: This study included brief qualitative, semi-structured online interviews. Adolescents (age 10-19 years) with long-term knee pain, who had been recommended "wait-and-see" by their general practitioner (GP), were recruited via previous studies and social media. Two researchers conducted brief semi-structured interviews through Microsoft Teams. An interview guide with open questions was created prior to the interviews and updated as new questions emerged. The extracted data was transcribed and analyzed via a reflexive thematic approach in NVivo.

Results: Eight adolescents (mean age 17.8) with longstanding or recurrent knee pain (mean duration 3.5 years) were included. The analysis identified four main themes: (1) The perception of wait and see over time, (2) The GP's acknowledgement and consideration, (3) experienced limitation from knee pain and (4) the importance of getting a diagnosis. The perception of "wait-and-see" approach changed from positive to negative when adolescents received the recommendation multiple times. Adolescents experienced frustration with their situation and a lack of consideration from their GP made them cautious about seeking additional care. Knee pain significantly limited the adolescents' physical-and social activities. Receiving a diagnosis was important and helped adolescents dealing with their pain.

Conclusions: The connotation of wait-and-see changed from positive to negative for adolescents when receiving the recommendation multiple times. The participants felt getting a clinical diagnosis was a relief. Furthermore, the lack of consideration and acknowledgement from the GP plays an essential role in the adolescent's understanding of their knee pain.

Implications: Recommending adolescents to "wait-and-see" multiple times in relation to their knee problems can lead adolescents experience frustration and a lack of consideration from their GP. It would be advisable for GPs to provide adolescents with a diagnosis as it can facilitate them in dealing with their pain and to use simple language when explaining adolescents their condition to improve communication.

Background: Mouth pain has been associated with abnormal vitamin B6 levels. Hypophosphatasia is a rare genetic disease, which causes imbalances between B6 vitamers. We report the case of a patient with hypophosphatasia and burning mouth pain.

Case presentation: A 39-year old Caucasian male with chronic burning mouth pain underwent extensive investigations with no cause of the pain being found. During the course of the investigation, an elevated vitamin B6 (pyridoxal phosphate) level was detected, which led to the diagnosis of hypophosphatasia. We hypothesize that the patient's mouth pain stems from hypophosphatasia through a B6 dependent mechanism.

Conclusions: Mouth pain may, in some cases, be a symptom of hypophosphatasia and when investigating B6 in relation to mouth pain, attention should be paid to the exact B6 vitamer measured. The case underlines the importance of low alkaline phosphatase results, especially in patients with unexplained pain, as this should prompt suspicion of hypophosphatasia.

Objectives: Several studies have demonstrated posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and chronic pain comorbidity. However, there is a lack of research on the psychological variables that might explain their co-occurrence. We investigated the mediating role of distress intolerance and pain catastrophizing in this relationship.

Methods: A moderated mediation model was tested. The sample comprised 114 individuals with chronic noncancer pain (90 women and 24 men; mean age, of 60.04 years [SD=9.76]).

Results: Catastrophizing had a significant effect on PTSD. Distress intolerance mediated catastrophizing and PTSD, and pain intensity moderated this relationship.

Conclusions: New insights are provided into the psychological variables that may explain PTSD and chronic noncancer pain comorbidity.

Objectives: Opioids are commonly used to manage pain, despite an increased risk of adverse events and complications when used against recommendations. This register study uses data of osteoarthritis (OA) patients with joint replacement surgery to identify and characterize problematic opioid use (POU) prescription patterns.

Methods: The study population included adult patients diagnosed with OA in specialty care undergoing joint replacement surgery in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden during 1 January 2011 to 31 December 2014. Those with cancer or OA within three years before the first eligible OA diagnosis were excluded. Patients were allocated into six POU cohorts based on dose escalation, frequency, and dosing of prescription opioids post-surgery (definitions were based on guidelines, previous literature, and clinical experience), and matched on age and sex to patients with opioid use, but not in any of the six cohorts. Data on demographics, non-OA pain diagnoses, cardiovascular diseases, psychiatric disorders, and clinical characteristics were used to study patient characteristics and predictors of POU.

Results: 13.7% of patients with OA and a hip/knee joint replacement were classified as problematic users and they had more comorbidities and higher pre-surgery doses of opioids than matches. Patients dispensing high doses of opioids pre-surgery dispensed increased doses post-surgery, a pattern not seen among patients prescribed lower doses pre-surgery. Being dispensed 1-4,500 oral morphine equivalents in the year pre-surgery or having a non-OA pain diagnosis was associated with post-surgery POU (OR: 1.44-1.50, and 1.11-1.20, respectively).

Conclusions: Based on the discovered POU predictors, the study suggests that prescribers should carefully assess pain management strategies for patients with a history of comorbidities and pre-operative, long-term opioid use. Healthcare units should adopt risk assessment tools and ensure that these patients are followed up closely. The data also demonstrate potential areas for further exploration in improving patient outcomes and trajectories.