对疼痛转移的见解以及不同类型转移任务中疼痛灾难化对疼痛感知的影响

Arash Asefi Rad, P. Wippert
{"title":"对疼痛转移的见解以及不同类型转移任务中疼痛灾难化对疼痛感知的影响","authors":"Arash Asefi Rad, P. Wippert","doi":"10.3389/fpain.2024.1266974","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Distraction is commonly used to reduce pain, but the effectiveness of distractions remains inconclusive. Studies have shown that pain catastrophizing could modulate the effectiveness of distraction strategies. The present study aimed to compare various distraction tasks, then control for pain catastrophizing, and examine how this relationship varies with pain intensity and unpleasantness across different distraction tasks.Forty-one pain-free participants (aged 27.00 ± 5.41) were recruited for a cross-sectional study. Four types of distraction (cognitive, sensory, emotional, and social) were presented, while moderate pain intensity was induced by electrical stimulation. Before starting the experiment, moderate pain intensity was individually calibrated as six on the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS) to control individual differences in pain sensitivity. Each participant performed all four distraction tasks in a random order. NRS measured pain assessment. Pain catastrophizing was measured by the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). A repeated measure ANCOVA was conducted to examine the effects of pain dimensions during distraction tasks as a within-subject and pain catastrophizing as a covariate factor.A significant difference was observed in the pain intensity and unpleasantness during cognitive distraction. After controlling for PCS, there were diverse associations between PCS and pain intensity across distinct distraction tasks: social vs. sensory, and cognitive vs. sensory distraction. A consistent pattern in pain unpleasantness emerged with minor variations. This interaction underscored notable distinctions between social vs. sensory and emotional distractions, as well as between cognitive vs. sensory and emotional distractions. However, only the correlation in social distraction remained significant in both pain dimensions.Our findings reveal that the link between PCS and pain dimensions varies across different distraction tasks, suggesting diverse interactions. Particularly, social distraction, characterized by both emotional and cognitive states, proves beneficial with lower PCS scores; however, this advantage diminishes as PCS scores increase.","PeriodicalId":12641,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Pain Research","volume":"60 14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Insights into pain distraction and the impact of pain catastrophizing on pain perception during different types of distraction tasks\",\"authors\":\"Arash Asefi Rad, P. Wippert\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/fpain.2024.1266974\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Distraction is commonly used to reduce pain, but the effectiveness of distractions remains inconclusive. Studies have shown that pain catastrophizing could modulate the effectiveness of distraction strategies. The present study aimed to compare various distraction tasks, then control for pain catastrophizing, and examine how this relationship varies with pain intensity and unpleasantness across different distraction tasks.Forty-one pain-free participants (aged 27.00 ± 5.41) were recruited for a cross-sectional study. Four types of distraction (cognitive, sensory, emotional, and social) were presented, while moderate pain intensity was induced by electrical stimulation. Before starting the experiment, moderate pain intensity was individually calibrated as six on the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS) to control individual differences in pain sensitivity. Each participant performed all four distraction tasks in a random order. NRS measured pain assessment. Pain catastrophizing was measured by the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). A repeated measure ANCOVA was conducted to examine the effects of pain dimensions during distraction tasks as a within-subject and pain catastrophizing as a covariate factor.A significant difference was observed in the pain intensity and unpleasantness during cognitive distraction. After controlling for PCS, there were diverse associations between PCS and pain intensity across distinct distraction tasks: social vs. sensory, and cognitive vs. sensory distraction. A consistent pattern in pain unpleasantness emerged with minor variations. This interaction underscored notable distinctions between social vs. sensory and emotional distractions, as well as between cognitive vs. sensory and emotional distractions. However, only the correlation in social distraction remained significant in both pain dimensions.Our findings reveal that the link between PCS and pain dimensions varies across different distraction tasks, suggesting diverse interactions. Particularly, social distraction, characterized by both emotional and cognitive states, proves beneficial with lower PCS scores; however, this advantage diminishes as PCS scores increase.\",\"PeriodicalId\":12641,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in Pain Research\",\"volume\":\"60 14\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in Pain Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2024.1266974\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Pain Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpain.2024.1266974","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

分散注意力通常用于减轻疼痛,但分散注意力的效果仍无定论。研究表明,疼痛灾难化可能会调节分散注意力策略的效果。本研究旨在比较各种分散注意力的任务,然后控制疼痛灾难化,并研究这种关系如何随不同分散注意力任务的疼痛强度和不愉快程度而变化。在电刺激诱发中等疼痛强度的情况下,实验中出现了四种分散注意力的任务(认知、感官、情感和社交)。在实验开始前,中度疼痛强度在数字疼痛评定量表(NRS)上被个别校准为 6,以控制疼痛敏感度的个体差异。每位受试者以随机顺序完成所有四项分散注意力任务。NRS 测量疼痛评估。疼痛灾难化量表(PCS)测量疼痛灾难化程度。研究人员进行了重复测量方差分析,将分散注意力任务中的疼痛维度作为受试内因素,将疼痛灾难化作为协变量因素,以考察其影响。在控制了 PCS 后,PCS 与疼痛强度之间在不同的分散注意力任务中存在不同的关联:社交分散注意力与感觉分散注意力、认知分散注意力与感觉分散注意力。在疼痛的不快感方面出现了一致的模式,但略有不同。这种交互作用强调了社交分散注意力与感官分散注意力和情绪分散注意力之间,以及认知分散注意力与感官分散注意力和情绪分散注意力之间的显著区别。我们的研究结果表明,在不同的分散注意力任务中,PCS 与疼痛维度之间的联系各不相同,这表明两者之间存在不同的相互作用。尤其是以情绪和认知状态为特征的社交分心,在 PCS 分数较低时证明是有益的;然而,随着 PCS 分数的增加,这种优势会逐渐减弱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Insights into pain distraction and the impact of pain catastrophizing on pain perception during different types of distraction tasks
Distraction is commonly used to reduce pain, but the effectiveness of distractions remains inconclusive. Studies have shown that pain catastrophizing could modulate the effectiveness of distraction strategies. The present study aimed to compare various distraction tasks, then control for pain catastrophizing, and examine how this relationship varies with pain intensity and unpleasantness across different distraction tasks.Forty-one pain-free participants (aged 27.00 ± 5.41) were recruited for a cross-sectional study. Four types of distraction (cognitive, sensory, emotional, and social) were presented, while moderate pain intensity was induced by electrical stimulation. Before starting the experiment, moderate pain intensity was individually calibrated as six on the Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS) to control individual differences in pain sensitivity. Each participant performed all four distraction tasks in a random order. NRS measured pain assessment. Pain catastrophizing was measured by the Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS). A repeated measure ANCOVA was conducted to examine the effects of pain dimensions during distraction tasks as a within-subject and pain catastrophizing as a covariate factor.A significant difference was observed in the pain intensity and unpleasantness during cognitive distraction. After controlling for PCS, there were diverse associations between PCS and pain intensity across distinct distraction tasks: social vs. sensory, and cognitive vs. sensory distraction. A consistent pattern in pain unpleasantness emerged with minor variations. This interaction underscored notable distinctions between social vs. sensory and emotional distractions, as well as between cognitive vs. sensory and emotional distractions. However, only the correlation in social distraction remained significant in both pain dimensions.Our findings reveal that the link between PCS and pain dimensions varies across different distraction tasks, suggesting diverse interactions. Particularly, social distraction, characterized by both emotional and cognitive states, proves beneficial with lower PCS scores; however, this advantage diminishes as PCS scores increase.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Intrauterine transfusion under fetal analgesia: the evaluation of perinatal outcomes Preserved tactile distance estimation despite body representation distortions in individuals with fibromyalgia The effect of dysmenorrhea severity and interference on reactions to experimentally-induced pain Co-producing research study recruitment strategies with and for children and young people for paediatric chronic pain studies A prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind, multi-center study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a blue light device for the treatment of chronic back pain
×
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