Pain pressure threshold algometry of the abdominal wall in healthy women

The objective of this study was to determine the inter- and intra-examiner reliability of pain pressure threshold algometry at various points of the abdominal wall of healthy women. Twenty-one healthy women in menacme with a mean age of 28 ± 5.4 years (range: 19-39 years) were included. All volunteers had regular menstrual cycles (27-33 days) and were right-handed and, to the best of our knowledge, none were taking medications at the time of testing. Women with a diagnosis of depression, anxiety or other mood disturbances were excluded. Women with previous abdominal surgery, any pain condition or any evidence of inflammation, hypertension, smoking, alcoholism, or inflammatory disease were also excluded. Pain perception thresholds were assessed with a pressure algometer with digital traction and compression and a measuring capacity for 5 kg. All points were localized by palpation and marked with a felt-tipped pen and each individual was evaluated over a period of 2 days in two consecutive sessions, each session consisting of a set of 14 point measurements repeated twice by two examiners in random sequence. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean pain threshold obtained by the two examiners on 2 diferent days (examiner A: P = 1.00; examiner B: P = 0.75; Wilcoxon matched pairs test). There was excellent/good agreement between examiners for all days and all points. Our results have established baseline values to which future researchers will be able to refer. They show that pressure algometry is a reliable measure for pain perception in the abdominal wall of healthy women.

Pain pressure threshold algometry of the abdominal wall in healthy women

The objective of this study was to determine the inter- and intra-examiner reliability of pain pressure threshold algometry at various points of the abdominal wall of healthy women. Twenty-one healthy women in menacme with a mean age of 28 +/- 5.4 years (range: 19-39 years) were included. All volunteers had regular menstrual cycles (27-33 days) and were right-handed and, to the best of our knowledge, none were taking medications at the time of testing. Women with a diagnosis of depression, anxiety or other mood disturbances were excluded. Women with previous abdominal surgery, any pain condition or any evidence of inflammation, hypertension, smoking, alcoholism, or inflammatory disease were also excluded. Pain perception thresholds were assessed with a pressure algometer with digital traction and compression and a measuring capacity for 5 kg. All points were localized by palpation and marked with a felt-tipped pen and each individual was evaluated over a period of 2 days in two consecutive sessions, each session consisting of a set of 14 point measurements repeated twice by two examiners in random sequence. There was no statistically significant difference in the mean pain threshold obtained by the two examiners on 2 diferent days (examiner A: P = 1.00; examiner B: P = 0.75; Wilcoxon matched pairs test). There was excellent/good agreement between examiners for all days and all points. Our results have established baseline values to which future researchers will be able to refer. They show that pressure algometry is a reliable measure for pain perception in the abdominal wall of healthy women.

Algometry with a clothes peg compared to an electronic pressure algometer: a randomized cross-sectional study in pain patients

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.

Comparison between the reliability levels of manual palpation and pressure pain threshold in children who reported orofacial pain

The aim of this study was to compare the intra-and inter-rater reliability of pressure pain threshold (PPT) and manual palpation (MP) of orofacial structures in symptomatic and symptom-free children for temporomandibular disorders (TMD). Fourteen children reporting pain in masticatory muscles or the temporomandibular joint and 16 symptom-free children were randomly assessed on three different occasions: by rater-1 in the first and third session and by rater-2 in the second session. The trained raters applied algometry and MP as recommended by the Research Diagnostic Criteria for TMD. Intraclass correlation coefficients and the Kappa statistic were used to assess the levels of reliability of PPT and MP, respectively. Excellent intra-and inter-rater reliability levels were observed for PPT values at most of the examined sites for symptom-free children and excellent and moderate reliability levels for children reporting pain. For MP, moderate and poor intra-rater and inter-rater reliability levels were observed for most sites in both groups. Algometry showed higher reliability levels for both groups of children and is recommended for pain assessment in children in association with MP. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mid-thoracic tenderness: a comparison of pressure pain threshold between spinal regions, in asymptomatic subjects

Palpation for tenderness forms an important part of the manual therapy assessment for musculoskeletal dysfunction, In conjunction with other testing procedures it assists in establishing the clinical diagnosis. Tenderness in the thoracic spine has been reported in the literature as a clinical feature in musculoskeletal conditions where pain and dysfunction are located primarily in the upper quadrant. This study aimed to establish whether pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) of the mid-thoracic region of asymptomatic subjects were naturally lower than those of the cervical and lumbar areas. A within-subject study design was used to examine PPT at four spinal levels C6, T4, T6, and L4 in 50 asymptomatic volunteers. Results showed significant (P < 0.001) regional differences. PPT values increased in a caudal direction. The cervical region had the lowest PPT scores, that is was the most tender. Values increased in the thoracic region and were highest in the lumbar region. This study contributes to the normative data on spinal PPT values and demonstrates that mid-thoracic tenderness relative to the cervical spine is not a normal finding in asymptomatic subjects. (C) 2001 Harcourt Publishers Ltd.

Is the effect of inguinal field block with 0.5 % bupivacaine on postoperative pain after hernia repair enhanced by addition of ketorolac or S(+) ketamine ?

Résumé Malgré l'apparition de nouvelles techniques chirurgicales dites « sans tension », l'antalgie post-opératoire après cure de hernie inguinale reste un défi pour les anesthésiologistes. Récemment on a suggéré que l'addition de ketamine ou d'un anti-inflammatoire non-stéroïdien (AINS) à un anesthésique local pourrait améliorer et prolonger l'analgésie postopératoire. Le but de cette étude, à laquelle ont participé 36 patients ASA I-II, était d'évaluer si la coadministration de S(+) ketamine ou de ketorolac renforcerait les effets analgésiques de la bupivacaïne après cure ambulatoire de hernie inguinale sous anesthésie générale. L'analgésie a consisté en une infiltration de la plaie associé à un bloc inguinal avec soit 30 ml de bupivacaïne 0,5 % (n=12), soit 27 ml de bupivacaïne 0,5 % + 3 ml de S(+) ketamine (75 mg) (n=12), soit 28 ml de bupivacaïne 0,5 % + 2 ml de ketorolac (60 mg) (n=12). La prise orale d'antalgique en phase postopératoire était standardisée. L'intensité des douleurs a été évaluée au moyen d'une échelle visuelle analogique (EVA), d'un score verbal d'estimation et par algométrie de pression respectivement 2, 4, 6, 24 et 48 heures après l'intervention. Les trois groupes de patients ont présenté le score de douleur évalué par EVA le plus élevé à 24 heures, score significativement différent de ceux mesurés à 6 et 48 heures (P <0.05). A part une sensation de douleurs significativement moindre (score verbal d'estimation) dans le groupe ketorolac à 24 et 48 heures et seulement à 48 heures dans le groupe ketamine, il n'y avait aucune autre différence entre les groupes pour la durée de l'étude (48 heures) en ce qui concerne les scores de douleur, les seuils de douleur à la pression ou la prise postopératoire d'antalgiques « de secours ». En conclusion, l'addition de S(+) ketamine ou de ketorolac, n'améliore que marginalement l'effet analgésique de la bupivacaïne. Ceci peut-être mis en relation avec la technique de cure de hernie « sans tension » induisant un bas niveau de douleur postopératoire. Abstract Objective: The aim of the study was to assess whether coadministration of S(±) ketamine or ketorolac would enhance or prolong local analgesic effect of bupivacaine after inguinal hernia repair. Design: Prospective double-blind randomized study evaluating pain intensity after surgery under general anesthesia. Setting: Outpatient facilities of the University Hospital of Lausanne. Patient: Thirty-six ASA I-II outpatients scheduled for elective day-case inguinal herniorraphy. Intervention: Analgesia strategy consisted of a wound infiltration and an inguinal field block either with 30 mL bupivacairie (0.5%) or with the same volume of a mixture of 27 mL bupivacaine (0.5%) + 3 mL S(+) ketamine (75 mg) or a 28 mL bupivacaine (0.5%) + 2 ML ketorolac (60 mg). Postoperative analgesic regimen was standardized. Outcome Measures: Pain intensity was assessed with a Visual Analog Seale, a verbal rating score, and by pressure algometry 2, 4, 6, 24, and 48 hours after surgery. Results: The 3 groups of patients experienced the highest Visual Analog Scale pain score at 24 hours, which was different from those at 6 and 48 hours (P < 0.05). Apart from a significantly lower pain sensation (verbal rating score) in the ketorolac group at 24 and 48 hours and only at 48 hours with ketamine, there were no other differences in pain scores, pain pressure thresholds, or rescue analgesic consumption between groups throughout the 48-hour study period. Conclusion: The addition of S (+)-ketamine or ketorolac only minimally improves the analgesic effect of bupivacaine. This may be related to the tension-free hernia repair technique associated with low postoperative pain.

Telehealth system (e-CUIDATE) to improve quality of life in breast cancer survivors: rationale and study protocol for a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND Breast cancer survivors suffer physical impairment after oncology treatment. This impairment reduces quality of life (QoL) and increase the prevalence of handicaps associated to unhealthy lifestyle (for example, decreased aerobic capacity and strength, weight gain, and fatigue). Recent work has shown that exercise adapted to individual characteristics of patients is related to improved overall and disease-free survival. Nowadays, technological support using telerehabilitation systems is a promising strategy with great advantage of a quick and efficient contact with the health professional. It is not known the role of telerehabilitation through therapeutic exercise as a support tool to implement an active lifestyle which has been shown as an effective resource to improve fitness and reduce musculoskeletal disorders of these women. METHODS / DESIGN This study will use a two-arm, assessor blinded, parallel randomized controlled trial design. People will be eligible if: their diagnosis is of stages I, II, or IIIA breast cancer; they are without chronic disease or orthopedic issues that would interfere with ability to participate in a physical activity program; they had access to the Internet and basic knowledge of computer use or living with a relative who has this knowledge; they had completed adjuvant therapy except for hormone therapy and not have a history of cancer recurrence; and they have an interest in improving lifestyle. Participants will be randomized into e-CUIDATE or usual care groups. E-CUIDATE give participants access to a range of contents: planning exercise arranged in series with breathing exercises, mobility, strength, and stretching. All of these exercises will be assigned to women in the telerehabilitation group according to perceived needs. The control group will be asked to maintain their usual routine. Study endpoints will be assessed after 8 weeks (immediate effects) and after 6 months. The primary outcome will be QoL measured by The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 version 3.0 and breast module called The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire. The secondary outcomes: pain (algometry, Visual Analogue Scale, Brief Pain Inventory short form); body composition; physical measurement (abdominal test, handgrip strength, back muscle strength, and multiple sit-to-stand test); cardiorespiratory fitness (International Fitness Scale, 6-minute walk test, International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form); fatigue (Piper Fatigue Scale and Borg Fatigue Scale); anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale); cognitive function (Trail Making Test and Auditory Consonant Trigram); accelerometry; lymphedema; and anthropometric perimeters. DISCUSSION This study investigates the feasibility and effectiveness of a telerehabilitation system during adjuvant treatment of patients with breast cancer. If this treatment option is effective, telehealth systems could offer a choice of supportive care to cancer patients during the survivorship phase. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01801527.