Is the conditioned pain modulation paradigm reliable? A test-retest assessment using the nociceptive withdrawal reflex.

The aim of this study was to determine the reliability of the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm assessed by an objective electrophysiological method, the nociceptive withdrawal reflex (NWR), and psychophysical measures, using hypothetical sample sizes for future studies as analytical goals....

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: José A Biurrun Manresa, Raphael Fritsche, Pascal H Vuilleumier, Carmen Oehler, Carsten D Mørch, Lars Arendt-Nielsen, Ole K Andersen, Michele Curatolo
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4065000?pdf=render
id doaj-2672fe617c274db4ba9f93ca66c53824
record_format Article
spelling doaj-2672fe617c274db4ba9f93ca66c538242020-11-25T00:40:23ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0196e10024110.1371/journal.pone.0100241Is the conditioned pain modulation paradigm reliable? A test-retest assessment using the nociceptive withdrawal reflex.José A Biurrun ManresaRaphael FritschePascal H VuilleumierCarmen OehlerCarsten D MørchLars Arendt-NielsenOle K AndersenMichele CuratoloThe aim of this study was to determine the reliability of the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm assessed by an objective electrophysiological method, the nociceptive withdrawal reflex (NWR), and psychophysical measures, using hypothetical sample sizes for future studies as analytical goals. Thirty-four healthy volunteers participated in two identical experimental sessions, separated by 1 to 3 weeks. In each session, the cold pressor test (CPT) was used to induce CPM, and the NWR thresholds, electrical pain detection thresholds and pain intensity ratings after suprathreshold electrical stimulation were assessed before and during CPT. CPM was consistently detected by all methods, and the electrophysiological measures did not introduce additional variation to the assessment. In particular, 99% of the trials resulted in higher NWR thresholds during CPT, with an average increase of 3.4 mA (p<0.001). Similarly, 96% of the trials resulted in higher electrical pain detection thresholds during CPT, with an average increase of 2.2 mA (p<0.001). Pain intensity ratings after suprathreshold electrical stimulation were reduced during CPT in 84% of the trials, displaying an average decrease of 1.5 points in a numeric rating scale (p<0.001). Under these experimental conditions, CPM reliability was acceptable for all assessment methods in terms of sample sizes for potential experiments. The presented results are encouraging with regards to the use of the CPM as an assessment tool in experimental and clinical pain. Trial registration: Clinical Trials.gov NCT01636440.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4065000?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author José A Biurrun Manresa
Raphael Fritsche
Pascal H Vuilleumier
Carmen Oehler
Carsten D Mørch
Lars Arendt-Nielsen
Ole K Andersen
Michele Curatolo
spellingShingle José A Biurrun Manresa
Raphael Fritsche
Pascal H Vuilleumier
Carmen Oehler
Carsten D Mørch
Lars Arendt-Nielsen
Ole K Andersen
Michele Curatolo
Is the conditioned pain modulation paradigm reliable? A test-retest assessment using the nociceptive withdrawal reflex.
PLoS ONE
author_facet José A Biurrun Manresa
Raphael Fritsche
Pascal H Vuilleumier
Carmen Oehler
Carsten D Mørch
Lars Arendt-Nielsen
Ole K Andersen
Michele Curatolo
author_sort José A Biurrun Manresa
title Is the conditioned pain modulation paradigm reliable? A test-retest assessment using the nociceptive withdrawal reflex.
title_short Is the conditioned pain modulation paradigm reliable? A test-retest assessment using the nociceptive withdrawal reflex.
title_full Is the conditioned pain modulation paradigm reliable? A test-retest assessment using the nociceptive withdrawal reflex.
title_fullStr Is the conditioned pain modulation paradigm reliable? A test-retest assessment using the nociceptive withdrawal reflex.
title_full_unstemmed Is the conditioned pain modulation paradigm reliable? A test-retest assessment using the nociceptive withdrawal reflex.
title_sort is the conditioned pain modulation paradigm reliable? a test-retest assessment using the nociceptive withdrawal reflex.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2014-01-01
description The aim of this study was to determine the reliability of the conditioned pain modulation (CPM) paradigm assessed by an objective electrophysiological method, the nociceptive withdrawal reflex (NWR), and psychophysical measures, using hypothetical sample sizes for future studies as analytical goals. Thirty-four healthy volunteers participated in two identical experimental sessions, separated by 1 to 3 weeks. In each session, the cold pressor test (CPT) was used to induce CPM, and the NWR thresholds, electrical pain detection thresholds and pain intensity ratings after suprathreshold electrical stimulation were assessed before and during CPT. CPM was consistently detected by all methods, and the electrophysiological measures did not introduce additional variation to the assessment. In particular, 99% of the trials resulted in higher NWR thresholds during CPT, with an average increase of 3.4 mA (p<0.001). Similarly, 96% of the trials resulted in higher electrical pain detection thresholds during CPT, with an average increase of 2.2 mA (p<0.001). Pain intensity ratings after suprathreshold electrical stimulation were reduced during CPT in 84% of the trials, displaying an average decrease of 1.5 points in a numeric rating scale (p<0.001). Under these experimental conditions, CPM reliability was acceptable for all assessment methods in terms of sample sizes for potential experiments. The presented results are encouraging with regards to the use of the CPM as an assessment tool in experimental and clinical pain. Trial registration: Clinical Trials.gov NCT01636440.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC4065000?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT joseabiurrunmanresa istheconditionedpainmodulationparadigmreliableatestretestassessmentusingthenociceptivewithdrawalreflex
AT raphaelfritsche istheconditionedpainmodulationparadigmreliableatestretestassessmentusingthenociceptivewithdrawalreflex
AT pascalhvuilleumier istheconditionedpainmodulationparadigmreliableatestretestassessmentusingthenociceptivewithdrawalreflex
AT carmenoehler istheconditionedpainmodulationparadigmreliableatestretestassessmentusingthenociceptivewithdrawalreflex
AT carstendmørch istheconditionedpainmodulationparadigmreliableatestretestassessmentusingthenociceptivewithdrawalreflex
AT larsarendtnielsen istheconditionedpainmodulationparadigmreliableatestretestassessmentusingthenociceptivewithdrawalreflex
AT olekandersen istheconditionedpainmodulationparadigmreliableatestretestassessmentusingthenociceptivewithdrawalreflex
AT michelecuratolo istheconditionedpainmodulationparadigmreliableatestretestassessmentusingthenociceptivewithdrawalreflex
_version_ 1725290388827144192