Predicting the spatiotemporal expression of local and referred acute muscle pain in individual subjects

Acute experimentally-induced pain replicates the distribution but not the quality or behaviour of clinical appendicular musculoskeletal pain. A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Experimental pain is a commonly used method to draw conclusions about the motor response to clinical musculoskeletal pain. A systematic review was performed to determine if current models of acute experimental pain validly replicate the clinical experience of appendicular musculoskeletal pain with respect to the distribution and quality of pain and the pain response to provocation testing.

METHODS

A structured search of Medline, Scopus and Embase databases was conducted from database inception to August 2020 using the following key terms: "experimental muscle pain" OR "experimental pain" OR "pain induced" OR "induced pain" OR "muscle hyperalgesia" OR ("Pain model" AND "muscle"). Studies in English were included if investigators induced experimental musculoskeletal pain into a limb (including the sacroiliac joint) in humans, and if they measured and reported the distribution of pain, quality of pain or response to a provocation manoeuvre performed passively or actively. Studies were excluded if they involved prolonged or delayed experimental pain, if temporomandibular, orofacial, lumbar, thoracic or cervical spine pain were investigated, if a full text of the study was not available or if they were systematic reviews. Two investigators independently screened each title and abstract and each full text paper to determine inclusion in the review. Disagreements were resolved by consensus with a third investigator.

RESULTS

Data from 57 experimental pain studies were included in this review. Forty-six of these studies reported pain distribution, 41 reported pain quality and six detailed the pain response to provocation testing. Hypertonic saline injection was the most common mechanism used to induce pain with 43 studies employing this method. The next most common methods were capsaicin injection (5 studies) and electrical stimulation, injection of acidic solution and ischaemia with three studies each. The distribution of experimental pain was similar to the area of pain reported in clinical appendicular musculoskeletal conditions. The quality of appendicular musculoskeletal pain was not replicated with the affective component of the McGill Pain Questionnaire consistently lower than that typically reported by musculoskeletal pain patients. The response to provocation testing was rarely investigated following experimental pain induction. Based on the limited available data, the increase in pain experienced in clinical populations during provocative maneuvers was not consistently replicated.

CONCLUSIONS

Current acute experimental pain models replicate the distribution but not the quality of chronic clinical appendicular musculoskeletal pain. Limited evidence also indicates that experimentally induced acute pain does not consistently increase with tests known to provoke pain in patients with appendicular musculoskeletal pain. The results of this review question the validity of conclusions drawn from acute experimental pain studies regarding changes in muscle behaviour in response to pain in the clinical setting.

Healthy Pain-Free Individuals with a History of Distal Radius Fracture Demonstrate an Expanded Distribution of Experimental Referred Pain Toward the Wrist

OBJECTIVE

Nociception caused by injuries may sensitize central mechanisms causing expanded pain areas. After recovery, the status of such pain distribution and sensitivity mechanisms is unknown. The present study investigated whether individuals who have fully recovered from a distal radius fracture demonstrate increased pain sensitivity and expanded distribution of pressure-induced pain.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional single-blinded study.

SETTING

Clinical setting.

SUBJECTS

Twenty-three pain-free individuals with a history of painful distal radius fracture and 22 nonfractured, age/gender-matched controls participated in two experimental sessions (day 0, day 1) 24 hours apart.

METHODS

Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) were recorded bilaterally at the extensor carpi radialis longus (ECRL), infraspinatus, and gastrocnemius muscles. Spatial distribution of pain was assessed following 60-second painful pressure stimulation at the ECRL (bilateral) and the infraspinatus muscles on the fractured or dominant side. Participants drew pain areas on a body map. After day 0 assessments, prolonged pain was induced by eccentric exercise of wrist extensors on the fractured/dominant side.

RESULTS

Compared with controls, pressure-induced ECRL pain in the fracture group referred more frequently toward the distal forearm (P < 0.005) on day 0. Both groups showed larger pain areas on day 1 compared with day 0 (P < 0.005), although the fracture group showed a larger relative change between days (P < 0.005). The fracture group showed larger pain areas on the fracture side compared with the contralateral side on both days (P < 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged pain and recovered prior painful injuries like fractures may sensitize pain mechanisms manifested as expanded pain distribution. Pressure-induced referred pain can be a simple pain biomarker for clinical use.

A critical evaluation of Quintner et al: missing the point

The objective of this article is to critically analyze a recent publication by Quinter, Bove and Cohen, published in Rheumatology, about myofascial pain syndrome and trigger points (Quintner et al., 2014). The authors concluded that the leading trigger point hypothesis is flawed in reasoning and in science. They claimed to have refuted the trigger point hypothesis. The current paper demonstrates that the Quintner et al. paper is a biased review of the literature replete with unsupported opinions and accusations. In summary, Quintner et al. have not presented any convincing evidence to believe that the Integrated TrP Hypothesis should be laid to rest.