Roland Staud, Melyssa M Godfrey, Joseph L Riley, Roger B Fillingim
{"title":"纤维肌痛患者的疼痛抑制和促进效率与健康对照组无异:敏感度调整测试刺激的相关性。","authors":"Roland Staud, Melyssa M Godfrey, Joseph L Riley, Roger B Fillingim","doi":"10.1177/20494637221138318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pain is a dynamic phenomenon dependent on the balance of endogenous excitatory and inhibitory systems, which can be characterized by quantitative sensory testing. Many previous studies of pain modulatory capacity of patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) have reported decreased pain inhibition or increased pain facilitation. This is the first study to assess pain modulation, including conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and temporal pain summation, in the same healthy control (HC) and FM participants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Only sensitivity-adjusted stimuli were utilized for testing of conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and temporal pain summation in 23 FM patients and 28 HC. All subjects received sensitivity-adjusted ramp-hold (sRH) during testing of pain facilitation (temporal summation) and pain inhibition (CPM). CPM efficacy was evaluated with test stimuli applied either concurrently or after application of the conditioning stimulus. Finally, the effects of CPM on pressure pain thresholds were tested.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>FM subjects required significantly less intense test and conditioning stimuli than HC participants to achieve standardized pain ratings of 50 ± 10 numerical rating scale (NRS) (<i>p</i> = 0.03). Using such stimuli, FM subjects' temporal pain summation and CPM efficacy was not significantly different from HC (all <i>p</i> > 0.05), suggesting similar pain facilitation and inhibition. Furthermore, the CPM efficacy of FM and HC participants was similar regardless of whether the test stimuli were applied during or after the conditioning stimulus (<i>p</i> > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Similar to previous studies, FM participants demonstrated hyperalgesia to heat, cold, and mechanical stimuli. However, using only sensitivity-adjusted stimuli during CPM and temporal summation testing, FM patients demonstrated similarly effective pain inhibition and facilitation than HC, suggesting that their pain modulation is not abnormal.</p>","PeriodicalId":46585,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Pain","volume":"17 2","pages":"182-194"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10088420/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Efficiency of pain inhibition and facilitation of fibromyalgia patients is not different from healthy controls: Relevance of sensitivity-adjusted test stimuli.\",\"authors\":\"Roland Staud, Melyssa M Godfrey, Joseph L Riley, Roger B Fillingim\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/20494637221138318\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Pain is a dynamic phenomenon dependent on the balance of endogenous excitatory and inhibitory systems, which can be characterized by quantitative sensory testing. Many previous studies of pain modulatory capacity of patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) have reported decreased pain inhibition or increased pain facilitation. This is the first study to assess pain modulation, including conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and temporal pain summation, in the same healthy control (HC) and FM participants.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Only sensitivity-adjusted stimuli were utilized for testing of conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and temporal pain summation in 23 FM patients and 28 HC. All subjects received sensitivity-adjusted ramp-hold (sRH) during testing of pain facilitation (temporal summation) and pain inhibition (CPM). CPM efficacy was evaluated with test stimuli applied either concurrently or after application of the conditioning stimulus. Finally, the effects of CPM on pressure pain thresholds were tested.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>FM subjects required significantly less intense test and conditioning stimuli than HC participants to achieve standardized pain ratings of 50 ± 10 numerical rating scale (NRS) (<i>p</i> = 0.03). Using such stimuli, FM subjects' temporal pain summation and CPM efficacy was not significantly different from HC (all <i>p</i> > 0.05), suggesting similar pain facilitation and inhibition. Furthermore, the CPM efficacy of FM and HC participants was similar regardless of whether the test stimuli were applied during or after the conditioning stimulus (<i>p</i> > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Similar to previous studies, FM participants demonstrated hyperalgesia to heat, cold, and mechanical stimuli. However, using only sensitivity-adjusted stimuli during CPM and temporal summation testing, FM patients demonstrated similarly effective pain inhibition and facilitation than HC, suggesting that their pain modulation is not abnormal.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46585,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of Pain\",\"volume\":\"17 2\",\"pages\":\"182-194\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10088420/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of Pain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/20494637221138318\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/12/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/20494637221138318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/12/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:疼痛是一种动态现象,取决于内源性兴奋和抑制系统的平衡,可通过定量感觉测试来描述。以往许多关于纤维肌痛综合征(FM)患者疼痛调节能力的研究都报告了疼痛抑制能力下降或疼痛促进能力增强的情况。这是第一项在相同的健康对照组(HC)和纤维肌痛综合征参与者中评估疼痛调节能力(包括条件性疼痛调节(CPM)和时间性疼痛总和)的研究:方法:在对 23 名 FM 患者和 28 名 HC 进行条件性疼痛调制(CPM)和时间性疼痛总和测试时,仅使用敏感度调整后的刺激物。所有受试者在测试疼痛促进(时间相加)和疼痛抑制(CPM)时都接受了敏感度调整后的斜坡保持(sRH)。在施加条件刺激的同时或之后施加测试刺激,以评估 CPM 的功效。最后,测试了 CPM 对压力痛阈的影响:结果:与 HC 受试者相比,FM 受试者需要的测试和调节刺激强度明显较低,才能达到 50 ± 10 的标准化疼痛评分(NRS)(p = 0.03)。在这种刺激下,FM 受试者的时间疼痛总和和 CPM 效能与 HC 受试者无明显差异(所有 p > 0.05),这表明疼痛的促进和抑制作用相似。此外,无论测试刺激是在条件刺激期间还是之后施加,FM 受试者和 HC 受试者的 CPM 效能都相似(P > 0.05):结论:与之前的研究相似,调频参与者对热、冷和机械刺激均表现出过痛。然而,在CPM和时间总和测试中,仅使用敏感度调整后的刺激,FM患者表现出的疼痛抑制和促进效果与HC相似,这表明他们的疼痛调节并无异常。
Efficiency of pain inhibition and facilitation of fibromyalgia patients is not different from healthy controls: Relevance of sensitivity-adjusted test stimuli.
Background: Pain is a dynamic phenomenon dependent on the balance of endogenous excitatory and inhibitory systems, which can be characterized by quantitative sensory testing. Many previous studies of pain modulatory capacity of patients with fibromyalgia syndrome (FM) have reported decreased pain inhibition or increased pain facilitation. This is the first study to assess pain modulation, including conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and temporal pain summation, in the same healthy control (HC) and FM participants.
Methods: Only sensitivity-adjusted stimuli were utilized for testing of conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and temporal pain summation in 23 FM patients and 28 HC. All subjects received sensitivity-adjusted ramp-hold (sRH) during testing of pain facilitation (temporal summation) and pain inhibition (CPM). CPM efficacy was evaluated with test stimuli applied either concurrently or after application of the conditioning stimulus. Finally, the effects of CPM on pressure pain thresholds were tested.
Results: FM subjects required significantly less intense test and conditioning stimuli than HC participants to achieve standardized pain ratings of 50 ± 10 numerical rating scale (NRS) (p = 0.03). Using such stimuli, FM subjects' temporal pain summation and CPM efficacy was not significantly different from HC (all p > 0.05), suggesting similar pain facilitation and inhibition. Furthermore, the CPM efficacy of FM and HC participants was similar regardless of whether the test stimuli were applied during or after the conditioning stimulus (p > 0.05).
Conclusion: Similar to previous studies, FM participants demonstrated hyperalgesia to heat, cold, and mechanical stimuli. However, using only sensitivity-adjusted stimuli during CPM and temporal summation testing, FM patients demonstrated similarly effective pain inhibition and facilitation than HC, suggesting that their pain modulation is not abnormal.
期刊介绍:
British Journal of Pain is a peer-reviewed quarterly British journal with an international multidisciplinary Editorial Board. The journal publishes original research and reviews on all major aspects of pain and pain management. Reviews reflect the body of evidence of the topic and are suitable for a multidisciplinary readership. Where empirical evidence is lacking, the reviews reflect the generally held opinions of experts in the field. The Journal has broadened its scope and has become a forum for publishing primary research together with brief reports related to pain and pain interventions. Submissions from all over the world have been published and are welcome. Official journal of the British Pain Society.