Algometry with a clothes peg compared to an electronic pressure algometer: a randomized cross-sectional study in pain patients
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hypersensitivity of the central nervous system is widely present in pain patients and recognized as one of the determinants of chronic pain and disability. Electronic pressure algometry is often used to explore aspects of central hyp...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2011-07-01
|
Series: | BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders |
Online Access: | http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/12/174 |
id |
doaj-7c7e8ce5b7134b28a14aab8b0e14b6d8 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-7c7e8ce5b7134b28a14aab8b0e14b6d82020-11-24T20:53:21ZengBMCBMC Musculoskeletal Disorders1471-24742011-07-0112117410.1186/1471-2474-12-174Algometry with a clothes peg compared to an electronic pressure algometer: a randomized cross-sectional study in pain patientsMarti ElizabethWegmann BarbaraCuratolo MicheleCámara Rafael JAvon Känel RolandKlingler NicoleEgloff NiklausFerrari Marie-Louise<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hypersensitivity of the central nervous system is widely present in pain patients and recognized as one of the determinants of chronic pain and disability. Electronic pressure algometry is often used to explore aspects of central hypersensitivity. We hypothesized that a simple pain provocation test with a clothes peg provides information on pain sensitivity that compares meaningfully to that obtained by a well-established electronic pressure algometer. "Clinically meaningful" was defined as a medium (r = 0.3-0.5) or high (r > 0.5) correlation coefficient according to Cohen's conventions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We tested 157 in-patients with different pain types. A calibrated clothes peg was applied for 10 seconds and patients rated the pain intensity on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale. Pressure pain detection threshold (PPdt) and pressure pain tolerance threshold (PPtt) were measured with a standard electronic algometer. Both methods were performed on both middle fingers and ear lobes. In a subgroup of 47 patients repeatability (test-retest reliability) was calculated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Clothes peg values correlated with PPdt values for finger testing with r = -0.54 and for earlobe testing with r = -0.55 (all p-values < 0.001). Clothes peg values also correlated with PPtt values for finger testing with r = -0.55 (p < 0.001). Test-retest reliability (repeatability) showed equally stable results for clothes peg algometry and the electronic algometer (all r-values > 0.89, all p-values < 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Information on pain sensitivity provided by a calibrated clothes peg and an established algometer correlate at a clinically meaningful level.</p> http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/12/174 |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Marti Elizabeth Wegmann Barbara Curatolo Michele Cámara Rafael JA von Känel Roland Klingler Nicole Egloff Niklaus Ferrari Marie-Louise |
spellingShingle |
Marti Elizabeth Wegmann Barbara Curatolo Michele Cámara Rafael JA von Känel Roland Klingler Nicole Egloff Niklaus Ferrari Marie-Louise Algometry with a clothes peg compared to an electronic pressure algometer: a randomized cross-sectional study in pain patients BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders |
author_facet |
Marti Elizabeth Wegmann Barbara Curatolo Michele Cámara Rafael JA von Känel Roland Klingler Nicole Egloff Niklaus Ferrari Marie-Louise |
author_sort |
Marti Elizabeth |
title |
Algometry with a clothes peg compared to an electronic pressure algometer: a randomized cross-sectional study in pain patients |
title_short |
Algometry with a clothes peg compared to an electronic pressure algometer: a randomized cross-sectional study in pain patients |
title_full |
Algometry with a clothes peg compared to an electronic pressure algometer: a randomized cross-sectional study in pain patients |
title_fullStr |
Algometry with a clothes peg compared to an electronic pressure algometer: a randomized cross-sectional study in pain patients |
title_full_unstemmed |
Algometry with a clothes peg compared to an electronic pressure algometer: a randomized cross-sectional study in pain patients |
title_sort |
algometry with a clothes peg compared to an electronic pressure algometer: a randomized cross-sectional study in pain patients |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders |
issn |
1471-2474 |
publishDate |
2011-07-01 |
description |
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Hypersensitivity of the central nervous system is widely present in pain patients and recognized as one of the determinants of chronic pain and disability. Electronic pressure algometry is often used to explore aspects of central hypersensitivity. We hypothesized that a simple pain provocation test with a clothes peg provides information on pain sensitivity that compares meaningfully to that obtained by a well-established electronic pressure algometer. "Clinically meaningful" was defined as a medium (r = 0.3-0.5) or high (r > 0.5) correlation coefficient according to Cohen's conventions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We tested 157 in-patients with different pain types. A calibrated clothes peg was applied for 10 seconds and patients rated the pain intensity on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale. Pressure pain detection threshold (PPdt) and pressure pain tolerance threshold (PPtt) were measured with a standard electronic algometer. Both methods were performed on both middle fingers and ear lobes. In a subgroup of 47 patients repeatability (test-retest reliability) was calculated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Clothes peg values correlated with PPdt values for finger testing with r = -0.54 and for earlobe testing with r = -0.55 (all p-values < 0.001). Clothes peg values also correlated with PPtt values for finger testing with r = -0.55 (p < 0.001). Test-retest reliability (repeatability) showed equally stable results for clothes peg algometry and the electronic algometer (all r-values > 0.89, all p-values < 0.001).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Information on pain sensitivity provided by a calibrated clothes peg and an established algometer correlate at a clinically meaningful level.</p> |
url |
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2474/12/174 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT martielizabeth algometrywithaclothespegcomparedtoanelectronicpressurealgometerarandomizedcrosssectionalstudyinpainpatients AT wegmannbarbara algometrywithaclothespegcomparedtoanelectronicpressurealgometerarandomizedcrosssectionalstudyinpainpatients AT curatolomichele algometrywithaclothespegcomparedtoanelectronicpressurealgometerarandomizedcrosssectionalstudyinpainpatients AT camararafaelja algometrywithaclothespegcomparedtoanelectronicpressurealgometerarandomizedcrosssectionalstudyinpainpatients AT vonkanelroland algometrywithaclothespegcomparedtoanelectronicpressurealgometerarandomizedcrosssectionalstudyinpainpatients AT klinglernicole algometrywithaclothespegcomparedtoanelectronicpressurealgometerarandomizedcrosssectionalstudyinpainpatients AT egloffniklaus algometrywithaclothespegcomparedtoanelectronicpressurealgometerarandomizedcrosssectionalstudyinpainpatients AT ferrarimarielouise algometrywithaclothespegcomparedtoanelectronicpressurealgometerarandomizedcrosssectionalstudyinpainpatients |
_version_ |
1716797318317998080 |