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. 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.

Reliability of Quantitative Sensory Tests in a Low Back Pain Population.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES Reliability is an essential condition for using quantitative sensory tests (QSTs) in research and clinical practice, but information on reliability in patients with chronic pain is sparse. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability of different QST in patients with chronic low back pain. METHODS Eighty-nine patients with chronic low back pain participated in 2 identical experimental sessions, separated by at least 7 days. The following parameters were recorded: pressure pain detection and tolerance thresholds at the toe, electrical pain thresholds to single and repeated stimulation, heat pain detection and tolerance thresholds at the arm and leg, cold pain detection threshold at the arm and leg, and conditioned pain modulation using the cold pressor test.Reliability was analyzed using the coefficient of variation, the coefficient of repeatability, and the intraclass correlation coefficient. It was judged as acceptable or not based primarily on the analysis of the coefficient of repeatability. RESULTS The reliability of most tests was acceptable. Exceptions were cold pain detection thresholds at the leg and arm. CONCLUSIONS Most QST measurements have acceptable reliability in patients with chronic low back pain.

Linking altered central pain processing and genetic polymorphism to drug efficacy in chronic low back pain.

BACKGROUND Inability to predict the therapeutic effect of a drug in individual pain patients prolongs the process of drug and dose finding until satisfactory pharmacotherapy can be achieved. Many chronic pain conditions are associated with hypersensitivity of the nervous system or impaired endogenous pain modulation. Pharmacotherapy often aims at influencing these disturbed nociceptive processes. Its effect might therefore depend on the extent to which they are altered. Quantitative sensory testing (QST) can evaluate various aspects of pain processing and might therefore be able to predict the analgesic efficacy of a given drug. In the present study three drugs commonly used in the pharmacological management of chronic low back pain are investigated. The primary objective is to examine the ability of QST to predict pain reduction. As a secondary objective, the analgesic effects of these drugs and their effect on QST are evaluated. METHODS/DESIGN In this randomized, double blinded, placebo controlled cross-over study, patients with chronic low back pain are randomly assigned to imipramine, oxycodone or clobazam versus active placebo. QST is assessed at baseline, 1 and 2 h after drug administration. Pain intensity, side effects and patients' global impression of change are assessed in intervals of 30 min up to two hours after drug intake. Baseline QST is used as explanatory variable to predict drug effect. The change in QST over time is analyzed to describe the pharmacodynamic effects of each drug on experimental pain modalities. Genetic polymorphisms are analyzed as co-variables. DISCUSSION Pharmacotherapy is a mainstay in chronic pain treatment. Antidepressants, anticonvulsants and opioids are frequently prescribed in a "trial and error" fashion, without knowledge however, which drug suits best which patient. The present study addresses the important need to translate recent advances in pain research to clinical practice. Assessing the predictive value of central hypersensitivity and endogenous pain modulation could allow for the implementation of a mechanism-based treatment strategy in individual patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01179828.

Pain hypersensitivity and spinal nociceptive hypersensitivity in chronic pain: prevalence and associated factors.

Hypersensitivity of pain pathways is considered a relevant determinant of symptoms in chronic pain patients, but data on its prevalence are very limited. To our knowledge, no data on the prevalence of spinal nociceptive hypersensitivity are available. We studied the prevalence of pain hypersensitivity and spinal nociceptive hypersensitivity in 961 consecutive patients with various chronic pain conditions. Pain threshold and nociceptive withdrawal reflex threshold to electrical stimulation were used to assess pain hypersensitivity and spinal nociceptive hypersensitivity, respectively. Using 10th percentile cutoff of previously determined reference values, the prevalence of pain hypersensitivity and spinal nociceptive hypersensitivity (95% confidence interval) was 71.2 (68.3-74.0) and 80.0 (77.0-82.6), respectively. As a secondary aim, we analyzed demographic, psychosocial, and clinical characteristics as factors potentially associated with pain hypersensitivity and spinal nociceptive hypersensitivity using logistic regression models. Both hypersensitivity parameters were unaffected by most factors analyzed. Depression, catastrophizing, pain-related sleep interference, and average pain intensity were significantly associated with hypersensitivity. However, none of them was significant for both unadjusted and adjusted analyses. Furthermore, the odds ratios were very low, indicating modest quantitative impact. To our knowledge, this is the largest prevalence study on central hypersensitivity and the first one on the prevalence of spinal nociceptive hypersensitivity in chronic pain patients. The results revealed an impressively high prevalence, supporting a high clinical relevance of this phenomenon. Electrical pain thresholds and nociceptive withdrawal reflex explore aspects of pain processing that are mostly independent of sociodemographic, psychological, and clinical pain-related characteristics.