Limits...
Individually based measurement of temporal summation evoked by a noxious tonic heat paradigm.

Suzan E, Aviram J, Treister R, Eisenberg E, Pud D - J Pain Res (2015)

Bottom Line: A "typical" pattern of pain response, characterized by a peak pain followed by a decrease in intensity to a nadir and subsequently a progressive increase in pain scores, was exhibited by 86.4% of the subjects.Additionally, using the individualized approach, we identified a different ("atypical") response pattern among the rest of the subjects (13.6%).The individualized TS calculation method seems advantageous since it better reflects individual magnitudes of TS.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel ; Institute of Pain Medicine, Rambam Health Care Campus, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.

ABSTRACT

Background: A model for measuring temporal summation (TS) by tonic noxious stimulation was recently proposed. However, methodological variations between studies make it difficult to reach a consensus regarding the way TS should be applied and calculated. The present study aimed to present a calculation method of TS magnitude produced by a tonic heat model in a large cohort of healthy subjects.

Methods: Noxious heat stimulation (46.5°C/2 minutes) was applied to the forearm of 154 subjects who continuously rated pain intensity using a computerized visual analog scale. TS was calculated by "mean group" and "individual" approaches.

Results: A "typical" pattern of pain response, characterized by a peak pain followed by a decrease in intensity to a nadir and subsequently a progressive increase in pain scores, was exhibited by 86.4% of the subjects. Using the "mean group" and "individual" calculation approaches, the mean ± standard deviation magnitudes of TS were 31.4±27.5 and 41.0±26.0, respectively (P<0.001). Additionally, using the individualized approach, we identified a different ("atypical") response pattern among the rest of the subjects (13.6%).

Conclusion: The results support the tonic heat model of TS for future utilization. The individualized TS calculation method seems advantageous since it better reflects individual magnitudes of TS.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Pain ratings of subgroup I (“typical”) (n=133).Note: Results are presented as mean ± SD.Abbreviations: Co-VAS, computerized visual analog scale; SD, standard deviation.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4509538&req=5

f1-jpr-8-409: Pain ratings of subgroup I (“typical”) (n=133).Note: Results are presented as mean ± SD.Abbreviations: Co-VAS, computerized visual analog scale; SD, standard deviation.

Mentions: The pattern of the average pain ratings during the entire test is exhibited in Figure 1. As can be seen, the primary peak pain occurred simultaneously with temperature stabilization at the destination temperature of 46.5°C. The nadir and the second peak pain points can be seen at 25 and 115 seconds, respectively, after temperature stabilization. Therefore, to calculate the “mean group TS”, the “average” nadir and second peak pain ratings for subgroup I (T25 and T115) were selected. The pain intensities at T25 and T115 were 28.6±25.8 and 60.0±32.4, respectively (t-test, P<0.001), and the mean group TS was 31.4±27.5.


Individually based measurement of temporal summation evoked by a noxious tonic heat paradigm.

Suzan E, Aviram J, Treister R, Eisenberg E, Pud D - J Pain Res (2015)

Pain ratings of subgroup I (“typical”) (n=133).Note: Results are presented as mean ± SD.Abbreviations: Co-VAS, computerized visual analog scale; SD, standard deviation.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4509538&req=5

f1-jpr-8-409: Pain ratings of subgroup I (“typical”) (n=133).Note: Results are presented as mean ± SD.Abbreviations: Co-VAS, computerized visual analog scale; SD, standard deviation.
Mentions: The pattern of the average pain ratings during the entire test is exhibited in Figure 1. As can be seen, the primary peak pain occurred simultaneously with temperature stabilization at the destination temperature of 46.5°C. The nadir and the second peak pain points can be seen at 25 and 115 seconds, respectively, after temperature stabilization. Therefore, to calculate the “mean group TS”, the “average” nadir and second peak pain ratings for subgroup I (T25 and T115) were selected. The pain intensities at T25 and T115 were 28.6±25.8 and 60.0±32.4, respectively (t-test, P<0.001), and the mean group TS was 31.4±27.5.

Bottom Line: A "typical" pattern of pain response, characterized by a peak pain followed by a decrease in intensity to a nadir and subsequently a progressive increase in pain scores, was exhibited by 86.4% of the subjects.Additionally, using the individualized approach, we identified a different ("atypical") response pattern among the rest of the subjects (13.6%).The individualized TS calculation method seems advantageous since it better reflects individual magnitudes of TS.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Technion-Israel Institute of Technology, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel ; Institute of Pain Medicine, Rambam Health Care Campus, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.

ABSTRACT

Background: A model for measuring temporal summation (TS) by tonic noxious stimulation was recently proposed. However, methodological variations between studies make it difficult to reach a consensus regarding the way TS should be applied and calculated. The present study aimed to present a calculation method of TS magnitude produced by a tonic heat model in a large cohort of healthy subjects.

Methods: Noxious heat stimulation (46.5°C/2 minutes) was applied to the forearm of 154 subjects who continuously rated pain intensity using a computerized visual analog scale. TS was calculated by "mean group" and "individual" approaches.

Results: A "typical" pattern of pain response, characterized by a peak pain followed by a decrease in intensity to a nadir and subsequently a progressive increase in pain scores, was exhibited by 86.4% of the subjects. Using the "mean group" and "individual" calculation approaches, the mean ± standard deviation magnitudes of TS were 31.4±27.5 and 41.0±26.0, respectively (P<0.001). Additionally, using the individualized approach, we identified a different ("atypical") response pattern among the rest of the subjects (13.6%).

Conclusion: The results support the tonic heat model of TS for future utilization. The individualized TS calculation method seems advantageous since it better reflects individual magnitudes of TS.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus