Quantitative sensory testing in pain states

Correlations Between Electrically Quantified Pain Degree, Subjectively Assessed Visual Analogue Scale, and the McGill Pain Questionnaire: A Pilot Study

Objective

To evaluate the clinical utility of the electrically calculated quantitative pain degree (QPD) and to correlate it with subjective assessments of pain degree including a visual analogue scale (VAS) and the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ).

Methods

We recruited 25 patients with low back pain. Of them, 21 patients suffered from low back pain for more than 3 months. The QPD was calculated using the PainVision (PV, PS-2100; Nipro Co., Osaka, Japan). We applied electrodes to the medial forearm of the subjects and the electrical stimulus was amplified sequentially. Minimum perceived current (MPC) and pain equivalent current (PEC) were defined as minimum electrical stimulation that could be sensed by the subject and electrical stimulation that could trigger actual pain itself. To eliminate individual differences, we defined QPD as the following: QPD=PEC-MPC/MPC. We scored pre-treatment QPD three times at admission and post-treatment QPD once at discharge. The VAS, MPQ, and QPD were evaluated and correlations between the scales were analyzed.

Results

Result showed significant test-retest reliability (ICC=0.967, p<0.001) and the correlation between QDP and MPQ was significant (at admission SRCC=0.619 and p=0.001; at discharge SRCC=0.628, p=0.001). However, the correlation between QPD and VAS was not significant (at admission SRCC=0.240, p=0.248; at discharge SRCC=0.289, p=0.161).

Conclusion

Numerical values measured with PV showed consistent results with repeated calculations. Electrically measured QPD showed an excellent correlation with MPQ but not with VAS. These results demonstrate that PV is a significantly reliable device for quantifying the intensity of low back pain.

A comparison of modality-specific somatosensory changes during menstruation in dysmenorrheic and nondysmenorrheic women

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to evaluate somatosensory thresholds to a multimodality stimulation regimen applied both within and outside areas of referred menstrual pain in dysmenorrheic women, over four phases of confirmed ovulatory cycles, and to compare them with thresholds in nondysmenorrheic women during menstruation.

DESIGN

Twenty dysmenorrheic women with menstrual pain scoring 5.45 +/- 0.39 cm (mean +/- standard error of mean) on a visual analog scale (10 cm) participated. Fifteen nondysmenorrheic women with a menstrual pain score of 0.4 +/- 0.2 cm participated as controls. Ovulation was confirmed by an enzyme-multiplied immunoassay technique. Menstrual pain was described with the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Areas within menstrual pain referral were two abdominal sites and the midline of the low back, and the arm and thigh were the control areas. The pressure pain threshold (PPT) and pinch pain threshold were determined by a hand-held electronic pressure algometer, the heat pain threshold (HPT) by a contact thermode, and the tactile threshold with von Frey hairs.

RESULTS

In dysmenorrheic women the McGill Pain Questionnaire showed a larger sensory and affective component of pain than the evaluative and miscellaneous groups. The HPT and PPT were lower in the menstrual phase than in the ovulatory, luteal, and premenstrual phases, both within and outside areas of referred menstrual pain (p <0.01), with a more pronounced decrease at the referral pain areas. The pinch pain threshold was lower in the menstrual phase than in the ovulatory phase (p <0.02), and the tactile threshold did not differ significantly across the menstrual phases or within any site. Dysmenorrheic women had a lower HPT at the control sites and a lower PPT at the abdomen, back, and control sites, than in those of nondysmenorrheic women in the menstrual phase.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show reduced somatosensory pain thresholds during menstruation to heat and pressure stimulation, both within and outside areas of referred menstrual pain in dysmenorrheic women. Dysmenorrheic women showed a lower HPT at the control sites and a lower PPT at all the sites than those for nondysmenorrheic women in the menstrual phase. The altered somatosensory thresholds may be dependent on a spinal mechanism of central hyperexcitability, induced by recurrent moderate to severe menstrual pain.