Recurrent low back pain patients demonstrate facilitated pronociceptive mechanisms when in pain, and impaired antinociceptive mechanisms with and without pain

Quantitative sensory testing and exercise-induced hypoalgesia protocols in low back pain: A scoping review

A significant driver of pain in individuals with low back pain (LBP) is alterations to endogenous pain modulation (EPM). EPM can be measured using quantitative sensory testing (QST), however; there are inconsistencies in the way QST has been implemented across the low back pain literature. The objective of this scoping review was to summarize protocols used to assess EPM using QST (pain pressure threshold (PPT), temporal summation (TS), conditioned pain modulation (CPM)) or exercise-induced hypoalgesia (EIH) in LBP. Databases Medline, Embase, CINAHL and AMED were searched on June 15, 2023, for articles that used QST or EIH protocols in LBP populations. Data was extracted on participants, study design, setting and details on QST and EIH protocols. Of the 221 studies included in the review, 196 used PPT, 62 used TS and 60 used CPM; only 5 studies investigated EIH. For all QST, there was high variability in the type of equipment, timing, trials, and testing location with many studies not reporting this information. There were 4 testing modalities used for TS, and 7 different test stimuli, and 3 different conditioning stimuli used across the studies for CPM. For CPM and EIH, PPT was the most common testing modality. There were 4 types of exercises used across the 5 EIH studies. This scoping review provides a summary of QST and EIH protocols in LBP that may be used as a guide for assessment in future studies. These results demonstrate a need for the development of standardized protocols and reporting guidelines. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents a summary of measures used to assess EPM in LBP. The results show the wide variability of protocols used in the literature. Future research should focus on creating standardized protocols, reporting guidelines and providing more guidance for researchers in selecting appropriate tests for their research questions.

Physical activity, sitting time, and thermal quantitative sensory testing responses in African Americans

Introduction

Prior research suggests that African Americans (AAs) have more frequent, intense, and debilitating pain and functional disability compared with non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs). Potential contributing factors to this disparity are physical activity and sedentary behavior, given that AAs are less physically active, and physical activity is associated with antinociception (whereas sedentary behavior is linked to pronociception). However, impact of these factors on pain processing has largely been unexplored in AAs, especially before chronic pain onset.

Objective

This study examined relationships between physical activity, sedentary behavior (sitting time), and laboratory measures of pain and pain modulation in adult AAs. These included heat pain threshold and tolerance, temporal summation of pain (TSP, a marker of central sensitization), and conditioned pain modulation (CPM, a marker of descending pain inhibition).

Methods

Multiple regressions were conducted to examine the effects of physical activity and sitting time on heat threshold and tolerance. Multilevel models were conducted to assess the relationship between physical activity, sitting time, and temporal summation of pain. Additional multilevel models were conducted to assess the relationship between physical activity, sitting time, and conditioned pain modulation.

Results

Higher level of physical activity, but not sitting time, was associated with reduced TSP slopes. Neither physical activity nor sitting time was associated with CPM slopes. No significant relationships between physical activity or sitting time and heat pain threshold or tolerance were detected.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that physical activity is associated with reduced TSP, an effect which may be driven by reduced spinal hyperexcitability in more active individuals. Thus, structural and individual interventions designed to increase physical activity in healthy, young AAs may be able to promote antinociceptive processes (ie, reduced TSP/reduced pain facilitation) potentially protective against chronic pain.

Responders and nonresponders to topical capsaicin display distinct temporal summation of pain profiles

Introduction

Topical application of capsaicin can produce an ongoing pain state in healthy participants. However, approximately one-third report no pain response (ie, nonresponders), and the reasons for this are poorly understood.

Objectives

In this study, we investigated temporal summation of pain (TSP) profiles, pain ratings and secondary hyperalgesia responses in responders and nonresponders to 1% topical capsaicin cream.

Methods

Assessments were made at baseline and then during an early (ie, 15 minutes) and late (ie, 45 minutes) time points post-capsaicin in 37 healthy participants.

Results

Participants reporting a visual analogue scale (VAS) rating of >50 were defined as responders (n = 24) and those with <50 VAS rating were defined as nonresponders (n = 13). There was a facilitation of TSP during the transition from an early to the late time point post-capsaicin (P<0.001) and the development of secondary hyperalgesia (P<0.05) in the responder group. Nonresponders showed no changes in TSP or secondary hyperalgesia during the early and late time points. There was an association between baseline TSP scores and the later development of a responder or nonresponder phenotype (r = 0.36; P = 0.03). Receiver operating characteristic analysis revealed that baseline TSP works as a good response predictor at an individual level (area under the curve = 0.75).

Conclusion

These data suggest that responders and nonresponders have different facilitatory pain mechanisms. The assessment of TSP may help to identify participants with stronger endogenous pain facilitation who may be more likely to respond to topical capsaicin.

Modulation of central pain mechanisms using high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation: A double-blind, sham-controlled study

BACKGROUND

The use of high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) has shown analgesic effects in some chronic pain patients, but limited anti-nociceptive effects in healthy asymptomatic subjects.

METHODS

This double-blinded sham-controlled study assessed the effects of HD-tDCS applied on three consecutive days on central pain mechanisms in healthy participants with (N = 40) and without (N = 40) prolonged experimental pain induced by intramuscular injection of nerve growth factor into the right hand on Day 1. Participants were randomly assigned to Sham-tDCS (N = 20 with pain, N = 20 without) or Active-tDCS (N = 20 with pain, N = 20 without) targeting simultaneously the primary motor cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex for 20 min with 2 mA stimulation intensity. Central pain mechanisms were assessed by cuff algometry on the legs measuring pressure pain sensitivity, temporal summation of pain (TSP) and conditioned pain modulation (CPM), at baseline and after HD-tDCS on Day 2 and Day 3. Based on subject's assessment of received HD-tDCS (sham or active), they were effectively blinded.

RESULTS

Compared with Sham-tDCS, Active-tDCS did not significantly reduce the average NGF-induced pain intensity. Tonic pain-induced temporal summation at Day 2 and Day 3 was significantly lower in the NGF-pain group under Active-tDCS compared to the pain group with Sham-tDCS (p ≤ 0.05). No significant differences were found in the cuff pressure pain detection/tolerance thresholds or CPM effect across the 3 days of HD-tDCS in any of the four groups.

CONCLUSION

HD-tDCS reduced the facilitation of TSP caused by tonic pain suggesting that efficacy of HD-tDCS might depend on the presence of sensitized central pain mechanisms.

Current Concept of Quantitative Sensory Testing and Pressure Pain Threshold in Neck/Shoulder and Low Back Pain

In recent years, several published articles have shown that quantitative sensory testing (QST) and pressure pain threshold (PPT) are useful in the analysis of neck/shoulder and low back pain. A valid reference for normal PPT values might be helpful for the clinical diagnosis of abnormal tenderness or muscle pain. However, there have been no reliable references for PPT values of neck/shoulder and back pain because the data vary depending on the devices used, the measurement units, and the area examined. In this article, we review previously published PPT articles on neck/shoulder and low back pain, discuss the measurement properties of PPT, and summarize the current data on PPT values in patients with chronic pain and healthy volunteers. We also reveal previous issues related to PPT evaluation and discuss the future of PPT assessment for widespread use in general clinics. We outline QST and PPT measurements and what kinds of perceptions can be quantified with the PPT. Ninety-seven articles were selected in the present review, in which we focused on the normative values and abnormal values in volunteers/patients with neck/shoulder and low back pain. We conducted our search of articles using PubMed and Medline, a medical database. We used a combination of “Pressure pain threshold” and “Neck shoulder pain” or “Back pain” as search terms and searched articles from 1 January 2000 to 1 June 2022. From the data extracted, we revealed the PPT values in healthy control subjects and patients with neck/shoulder and low back pain. This database could serve as a benchmark for future research with pressure algometers for the wide use of PPT assessment in clinics.

Pain Sensitivity and Psychiatric Comorbidities in Chronic Pancreatitis Patients With and Without Pain: Past Experience Matters

Background and Aims

Pain is the primary symptom of chronic pancreatitis (CP) and has been associated with abnormal pain processing and psychologic distress. Little is known about these phenomena in patients with painless disease. The aim of this study was to characterize patterns of pain processing and psychologic distress in patients with primary painless vs painful CP.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional multicenter study of 235 patients with definitive CP. Patients were categorized based on current and past pain history; current pain (79%), no current (but prior) pain (11%), and painless CP (10%). Demographic information and clinical data including symptoms of anxiety and depression using the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale were collected. All patients underwent quantitative sensory testing to assess patterns of pain processing.

Results

A total of 235 patients (57% males, mean age 53.9 ± 14.0 years, 41% alcohol etiology) were included. Compared to patients with painless CP, enhanced pain sensitivity was observed in both patients with current pain (odds ratio [OR] 3.29; 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.11-9.77], P = .032) and no current pain (OR 4.07; 95% CI [1.10-15.03], P = .035). Patients with current pain also had increased depression prevalence compared to patients with painless CP (OR 6.15; 95% CI [1.28-29.41], P = .023), while no difference was seen for patients with no current pain (OR 1.24; 95% CI [0.19-8.26], P = .824).

Conclusion

Total absence of pain in CP is associated with normal pain processing and low prevalence of psychologic distress, whereas patients with prior pain experience appear to have persistent and enhanced pain sensitivity even in the absence of clinical pain and psychologic distress.

The Definition, Assessment, and Prevalence of (Human Assumed) Central Sensitisation in Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain: A Systematic Review

Central sensitisation is assumed to be one of the underlying mechanisms for chronic low back pain. Because central sensitisation is not directly assessable in humans, the term 'human assumed central sensitisation' (HACS) is suggested. The objectives were to investigate what definitions for HACS have been used, to evaluate the methods to assess HACS, to assess the validity of those methods, and to estimate the prevalence of HACS. Database search resulted in 34 included studies. Forty different definition references were used to define HACS. This review uncovered twenty quantitative methods to assess HACS, including four questionnaires and sixteen quantitative sensory testing measures. The prevalence of HACS in patients with chronic low back pain was estimated in three studies. The current systematic review highlights that multiple definitions, assessment methods, and prevalence estimates are stated in the literature regarding HACS in patients with chronic low back pain. Most of the assessment methods of HACS are not validated but have been tested for reliability and repeatability. Given the lack of a gold standard to assess HACS, an initial grading system is proposed to standardize clinical and research assessments of HACS in patients with a chronic low back.

Changes in Pain Sensitivity and Conditioned Pain Modulation During Recovery From Whiplash-associated Disorders

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to investigate the pain-sensory profile of patients with whiplash-associated disorders (WADs) prior and post 2 weeks of standardized rehabilitation and after a 6-month follow-up.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-two WAD participants (grade II; 14 women) and 22 sex-matched and age-matched healthy pain-free controls were enrolled. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) were assessed at local and distal muscles. Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) of PPTs was assessed using cuff pressure around the upper arm. Referred area of pain following supra-threshold pressure stimulation of the infraspinatus muscle was recorded on a body chart. Psychometric variables (pain intensity, area of perceived pain, pain catastrophizing, kinesiophobia, sleep problems, and depression level) were assessed. WAD group additionally completed the Neck Disability Index.

RESULTS

The WAD group demonstrated lower local PPTs compared with controls at all time points (P<0.05) and lower distal PPTs at baseline and at 2 weeks when compared with 6 months (within-group) (P<0.05). The WAD group had a reduced CPM response and larger induced referred pain areas compared with controls (P<0.05), while no within-group changes were observed at any time point. The WAD group reported higher pain intensity and perceived area of pain compared with controls at all time points (P<0.05) and a mean Neck Disability Index score of 41% at baseline, 16% at 2 weeks, and 4% at 6 months. Furthermore, the WAD group reported improvements in all other psychometric variables (P<0.05), although only pain catastrophizing levels were comparable to controls at 2 weeks.

DISCUSSION

PPTs but not CPM improved in the WAD group and were comparable to controls following 2 weeks following standardized rehabilitation, indicating that normalization of CPM may not be required to recover from WAD.

Does Quantitative Sensory Testing Improve Prediction of Chronic Pain Trajectories? A Longitudinal Study of Youth With Functional Abdominal Pain Participating in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Cognitive Behavioral Treatment

OBJECTIVES

Youth with functional abdominal pain (FAP) experience significant pain-related distress and functional impairment. Although quantitative sensory testing protocols have identified alterations in pain modulatory systems that distinguish youth with FAP from healthy controls, the extent to which evoked pain responses predict subsequent trajectories of pain symptoms and disability over and above established psychosocial risk factors is unclear.

METHODS

The present study included 183 adolescents with FAP who were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial comparing an 8-week, internet-delivered program of cognitive behavior therapy (n=90) or pain education (n=93). Participants completed a quantitative sensory testing protocol before the intervention and were followed for 12-month posttreatment.

RESULTS

Whereas adolescents with FAP who exhibited stronger baseline conditioned pain modulation (CPM) reported decreases in pain-related interference over follow-up (b=-0.858, SE=0.396, P=0.032), those with weaker CPM exhibited high, relatively stable levels of pain-related interference over time (b=-0.642, SE=0.400, P=0.110). CPM status predicted changes in pain-related interference after controlling for the effects of treatment condition and psychosocial risk factors. Static measures of pain sensitivity (ie, pain threshold, pain tolerance) and temporal summation of second pain were not associated with changes in measures of abdominal pain, gastrointestinal symptom severity, or pain-related interference over follow-up.

DISCUSSION

The present findings contribute to a growing literature on the predictive utility of quantitative sensory testing indices and suggest that CPM may complement existing psychosocial risk measures in determining individualized pain-related risk profiles.

Positive affect and distraction enhance while negative affect impairs pain modulation in recurrent low back pain patients and matched controls

ABSTRACT

Pathophysiological causes of low back pain (LBP) remain generally unclear, so focus has shifted to psychosocial features and central pain processing. Effects of attentional and affective manipulation on conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and tonic pain perception were examined in thirty recurrent LBP patients in two sessions, one with and one without clinical pain, and compared to healthy participants. Phasic cuff pressure on one leg, scored on a numerical rating scale (NRS), was used for test-stimuli (TS) and contralateral tonic cuff pain rated on an electronic visual analogue scale (eVAS) was the conditioning-stimulus (CS). TS were assessed before and during: 1) control with no manipulation/CS, 2) three attentional manipulations (Flanker with/without CS or CS-Only), and 3) three affective manipulations (positive, neutral, negative pictures) with CS. Greater inhibition of TS-NRS scores was observed in CS-only (P=0.028), combined CS&attention (P=0.026), and CS&Positive (P=0.006) than Control paradigms, and greater in CS&Positive (P=0.019) than CS&Negative paradigms. eVAS scores of CS pain increased throughout all paradigms with CS (P<0.05), except the CS&Positive paradigm, and greater facilitation was observed in the CS-Only paradigm than all others (P<0.02) and lower facilitation was additionally observed in the CS&Positive paradigm compared to CS&Attention and CS&Negative paradigms (P<0.01). Flanker effects and interruptive effects of CS pain on attention were observed consistent with prior findings, and affective manipulation produced less shift in valence among people with RLBP than controls (P<0.05). Attention and positive affect with CS pain evoked CPM, and all attentional/affective tasks, especially positive affect, reduced facilitation of CS pain.

Medial Prefrontal High-Definition Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation to Improve Pain Modulation in Chronic Low Back Pain: A Pilot Randomized Double-blinded Placebo-Controlled Crossover Trial

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is highly disabling, but often without identifiable source. Focus has been on impaired anti-nociceptive mechanisms contributing to pain maintenance, though methods of targeting this impairment remain limited. This randomised-controlled cross-over pilot trial used active versus sham medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) for 3-consecutive days to improve descending pain inhibitory function. Twelve CLBP patients were included with an average visual analogue scale (VAS) pain intensity of 3.0 ± 1.5 and pain duration of 5.3 ± 2.6 years. Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs), conditioned pain modulation (CPM), and temporal summation of pain (TSP) assessed by cuff algometry, as well as pain symptomatology (intensity, unpleasantness, quality, disability) and related psychological features (pain catastrophizing, anxiety, affect), were assessed on Day1 before 3 consecutive days of HD-tDCS sessions (each 20 minutes), at 24-hours (Day 4) and 2-weeks (Day 21) following final HD-tDCS. Blinding was successful. No significant differences in psychophysical (PPT, CPM, TSP), symptomatology or psychological outcomes were observed between active and sham HD-tDCS on Day4 and Day21. CPM-effects at Day 1 negatively correlated with change in CPM-effect at Day4 following active HD-tDCS (P = .002). Lack of efficacy was attributed to several factors, not least that patients did not display impaired CPM at baseline. TRIAL REGISTRATION: : ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03864822). PERSPECTIVE: Medial prefrontal HD-tDCS did not alter pain, psychological nor psychophysical outcomes, though correlational analysis suggested response may depend on baseline pain inhibitory efficacy, with best potential effects in patients with severe impairments in descending pain inhibitory mechanisms. Future work should focus on appropriate patient selection and optimising stimulation targeting.

Neocortical circuits in pain and pain relief

The sensory, associative and limbic neocortical structures play a critical role in shaping incoming noxious inputs to generate variable pain perceptions. Technological advances in tracing circuitry and interrogation of pathways and complex behaviours are now yielding critical knowledge of neocortical circuits, cellular contributions and causal relationships between pain perception and its abnormalities in chronic pain. Emerging insights into neocortical pain processing suggest the existence of neocortical causality and specificity for pain at the level of subdomains, circuits and cellular entities and the activity patterns they encode. These mechanisms provide opportunities for therapeutic intervention for improved pain management.

Pain referral area is reduced by remote pain

BACKGROUND

Endogenous pain inhibitory mechanisms are known to reduce pain intensity, but whether they influence the size and distribution of pain referral is unclear. This study aimed to determine if referred pain is reduced by applying a remote, conditioning painful stimulus.

METHODS

Twenty-four healthy men participated in this randomized, crossover study with a control and conditioning session. Referred pain was induced from the infraspinatus muscle (dominant side) by a painful pressure for 60 s. When applying pressure, the intensity was adjusted to a local pain intensity of 7/10 on a numerical rating scale. In the conditioning session, tonic painful pressure was simultaneously applied to the non-dominant leg during induction of referred pain. The area of referred pain was drawn onto a digital body chart and size extracted for data analysis.

RESULTS

For the total group and in a subgroup with distinct patterns of referred pain (n = 15/24), the pain area perceived in the back and front+back was smaller during the conditioning compared with the control (p < 0.05). No significant difference was found between sessions in a subgroup only demonstrating local pain (n = 9/24).

CONCLUSIONS

Engaging the descending noxious inhibitory control reduced the size of pain areas predominately when distinct pain referral was present. Assuming a conditioning effect of descending inhibitory control acting on dorsal horn neurons, these findings may indicate that mechanisms underlying pain referral can be modulated by endogenous control. The findings may indicate that referred pain may be a useful proxy to evaluate sensitivity of central pain mechanisms as previously suggested.

SIGNIFICANCE

The current results indicate a link between endogenous inhibition and pain referral. Descending inhibitory control effects on pain referral support a spinal mechanism involved in pain referral. Future studies should investigate whether the spatial characteristics of referred pain (e.g. size, frequency of affected body regions and distribution away from the primary nociceptive stimulus) can useful to evaluate the efficiency of endogenous pain modulation.

Effect of Transversus abdominis muscle training on pressure-pain threshold in patients with chronic low Back pain

Background

Therapeutic training is the most commonly used treatment methods for chronic low back pain (CLBP), and the use of a pressure biofeedback unit for transversus abdominis muscle (TrA) training is one of the core muscle training methods. The study aim of this research is to explore the effects of different intensities (sham training, low-intensity and high-intensity) of TrA muscle training on people with CLBP in pressure-pain threshold (PPT).

Methods

A total of 45 patients with CLBP were recruited, of whom 44 were included in the analysis. Fifteen, 14, and 15 were included in the sham training group, the low-intensity group, and the high-intensity group, respectively. A pressure biofeedback unit was used in performing a one-time TrA training intervention involving 30 times of 180 mmHg TrA contraction training at high intensity for 10 min and 15 times of 100 mmHg TrA contraction training at low intensity for 5 min. The sham training group completed comfort exercises and did not undergo training. The evaluation indicators were as follows: PPT, short-form McGill pain questionnaire, and body surface pain radiation.

Results

High-intensity training could activate more waist core muscles than low-intensity training. Significant changes on PPT (units: kgf) were observed in the following four muscles immediately after high-intensity training: iliopsoas [0.69 (0.13–1.25) 95% CI, p = 0.020]; quadratus lumborum [0.84 (0.23–1.45) 95% CI, p = 0.012]; erector spinae [0.66 (0.18–1.15) 95% CI, p = 0.011]; transversus abdominis [0.70 (0.26–1.14) 95% CI, p = 0.004], and in three muscles after low-intensity training: quadratus lumborum [0.61 (0.17–1.05) 95% CI, p = 0.009]; transversus abdominis [0.14 (from − 0.15 to 0.43) 95% CI, p = 0.022]; piriformis [0.55 (0.13–0.98) 95% CI, p = 0.014]. The change in body surface pain radiation immediately after exercise was [− 10.87 (from − 17.51 to − 4.22) 95% CI, p = 0.003] for high-intensity training and [− 5.21 (from − 9.40 to − 1.03) 95% CI, p = 0.019] for low-intensity training.

Conclusions

TrA training could increase the PPT of the waist core muscles and reduce the radiation range of waist pain. The benefits of high-intensity training are higher than those of low-intensity training.

Trial registration

ChiCTR-TRC-13003701. Registered 18 October 2013.

Code of ethical approval: 2018069.

Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) Effects Captured in Facial Expressions

Purpose

Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is most often assessed using self-report of pain. However, self-report of pain is not always available (eg in individuals with cognitive impairment) and is susceptible to report bias. In comparison, the facial expression of pain is more reflex-like and represents one of the most sensitive and specific non-verbal signals of pain. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the facial expression of pain is sensitive enough to capture endogenous pain inhibition as elicited during CPM paradigms.

Patients and Methods

In total, 26 female participants took part in this study. Facial and verbal responses to phasic heat pain were assessed once while participants immersed their hand in a hot water bath and once without additional stimulation. Facial responses were analyzed using the Facial Action Coding System (FACS). Verbal responses were assessed using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS).

Results

Pain-relevant facial responses as well as pain ratings to phasic heat pain were significantly reduced when participants simultaneously immersed their hand in a hot water bath compared to baseline. Thus, CPM effects could be demonstrated both on subjective as well as on facial responses. Moreover, CPM-induced changes in pain-relevant facial responses and in NRS ratings were significantly correlated.

Conclusion

The present study shows that facial expressions of pain are sensitive enough to capture CPM effects. Given the proven clinical usefulness of assessing CPM, the parallel assessment of verbal and facial CPM effects might be a promising approach with wider scope of applications. Further research in other demographic healthy participant and clinical cohorts is warranted.

Challenges and opportunities in translational pain research - An opinion paper of the working group on translational pain research of the European pain federation (EFIC)

For decades, basic research on the underlying mechanisms of nociception has held promise to translate into efficacious treatments for patients with pain. Despite great improvement in the understanding of pain physiology and pathophysiology, translation to novel, effective treatments for acute and chronic pain has however been limited, and they remain an unmet medical need. In this opinion paper bringing together pain researchers from very different disciplines, the opportunities and challenges of translational pain research are discussed. The many factors that may prevent the successful translation of bench observations into useful and effective clinical applications are reviewed, including interspecies differences, limited validity of currently available preclinical disease models of pain, and limitations of currently used methods to assess nociception and pain in non-human and human models of pain. Many paths are explored to address these issues, including the backward translation of observations made in patients and human volunteers into new disease models that are more clinically relevant, improved generalization by taking into account age and sex differences, and the integration of psychobiology into translational pain research. Finally, it is argued that preclinical and clinical stages of developing new treatments for pain can be improved by better preclinical models of pathological pain conditions alongside revised methods to assess treatment-induced effects on nociception in human and non-human animals. Significance: For decades, basic research of the underlying mechanisms of nociception has held promise to translate into efficacious treatments for patients with pain. Despite great improvement in the understanding of pain physiology and pathophysiology, translation to novel, effective treatments for acute and chronic pain has however been limited, and they remain an unmet medical need.

Medial Prefrontal Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation Aimed to Improve Affective and Attentional Modulation of Pain in Chronic Low Back Pain Patients

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is often without clear underlying pathology. Affective disturbance and dysfunctional pain mechanisms, commonly observed in populations with CLBP, have, therefore, been suggested as potential contributors to CLBP development and maintenance. However, little consensus exists on how these features interact and if they can be targeted using non-invasive brain stimulation. In this pilot trial, 12 participants completed two phases (Active or Sham) of high-definition transcranial direct current stimulation (HD-tDCS) to the medial prefrontal cortex, applied for 20 min on three consecutive days. Clinical pain ratings, questionnaires, and sensitivity to painful cuff pressure were completed at baseline, then 4 trials of conditioned pain modulation (CPM; alone, with distraction using a Flanker task, with positive affect induction, and with negative affect induction using an image slideshow) were performed prior to HD-tDCS on Day 1 and Day 4 (24 h post-HD-tDCS). At baseline, attentional and affective manipulations were effective in inducing the desired state (p < 0.001) but did not significantly change the magnitude of CPM-effect. Active HD-tDCS was unable to significantly alter the magnitude of the shift in valence and arousal due to affective manipulations, nor did it alter the magnitude of CPM under any basal, attentional, or affective manipulation trial significantly on Day 4 compared to sham. The CPM-effect was greater across all manipulations on Day 1 than Day 4 (p < 0.02) but also showed poor reliability across days. Future work is needed to expand upon these findings and better understand how and if HD-tDCS can be used to enhance attentional and affective effects on pain modulation.

Masterclass: A pragmatic approach to pain sensitivity in people with musculoskeletal disorders and implications for clinical management for musculoskeletal clinicians

INTRODUCTION

Research on musculoskeletal disorders indicates that pain sensitivity can be an important consideration for musculoskeletal clinicians in the holistic view of a patient presentation. However, diversity in research findings in this field can make this a difficult concept for clinicians to navigate. Limited integration of the concept of pain sensitivity into clinical practice for musculoskeletal clinicians has been noted.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this masterclass is to provide a framework for the consideration of pain sensitivity as a contributing factor in the presentation of people with musculoskeletal pain. It provides pragmatic synthesis of the literature related to pain sensitivity through a lens of how this information can inform clinical practice for musculoskeletal clinicians. Guidance is provided in a 'how to' format for integration of this knowledge into the clinical encounter to facilitate personalised care.

IMPLICATIONS

The relationship of pain sensitivity with pain and disability is not clear or linear. The real importance of pain sensitivity in a clinical presentation may be: (1) the potential for pain sensitivity to modify the effect of common treatments utilised by musculoskeletal clinicians, or (2) the effect of pain sensitivity on the prognosis/course of a disorder. Screening tools and subjective features have been highlighted to indicate when physical assessment of pain sensitivity should be prioritised in the physical examination. A pragmatic blueprint for specific assessment related to pain sensitivity has been outlined. A framework for integrating assessment findings into clinical reasoning to formulate management plans for the pain sensitive patient is provided.

Tapentadol treatment results in long-term pain relief in patients with chronic low back pain and associates with reduced segmental sensitization

The endogenous pain system may be used as a biomarker in the pharmacological treatment of patients with CLBP, enabling an individualized, mechanism-based treatment approach.

Introduction:

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is one of the most common chronic pain conditions in pain practice.

Objectives:

In the current study, we describe phenotypes of patients with CLBP based on the status of their endogenous pain modulatory system.

Methods:

Conditioned pain modulation (a measure of central pain inhibition), temporal summation (TS, a measure of pain facilitation), and offset analgesia (a measure of temporal filtering of nociception) were evaluated in 53 patients with CLBP at painful and nonpainful sites. Next, in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, 40 patients with defective conditioned pain modulation responses received treatment with tapentadol prolonged-release or placebo for 3 months.

Results:

The majority of patients (87%) demonstrated loss of central pain inhibition combined with segmentally increased TS and reduced offset analgesia at the lower back region. During treatment, tapentadol reduced pain intensity more than placebo (tapentadol −19.5 ± 2.1 mm versus placebo −7.1 ± 1.8 mm, P = 0.025). Furthermore, tapentadol significantly decreased pain facilitation by reduction of TS responses at the lower back (tapentadol −0.94 ± 1.9 versus placebo 0.01 ± 1.5, P = 0.020), which correlated with pain reduction (P < 0.001).

Conclusion:

Patients with CLBP demonstrated different phenotypes of endogenous pain modulation. In patients with reduced conditioned pain modulation, tapentadol produced long-term pain relief that coincided with reduction of signs of pain facilitation. These data indicate that the endogenous pain system may be used as a biomarker in the pharmacological treatment of CLBP, enabling an individualized, mechanism-based treatment approach.

Pain inhibition is not affected by exercise-induced pain

Introduction:

Offset analgesia (OA) and conditioned pain modulation (CPM) are frequently used paradigms to assess the descending pain modulation system. Recently, it was shown that both paradigms are reduced in chronic pain, but the influence of acute pain has not yet been adequately examined.

Objectives:

The aim of this study is to investigate OA and CPM after exercise-induced pain to evaluate whether these tests can be influenced by delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS) at a local or remote body site.

Methods:

Forty-two healthy adults were invited to 3 separate examination days: a baseline appointment, the consecutive day, and 7 days later. Participants were randomly divided into a rest (n = 21) and an exercise group (n = 21). The latter performed a single intensive exercise for the lower back. Before, immediately after, and on the following examination days, OA and CPM were measured at the forearm and the lower back by blinded assessor.

Results:

The exercise provoked a moderate pain perception and a mild delayed-onset muscle soreness on the following day. Repeated-measurements analysis of variance showed no statistically significant main effect for either OA or CPM at the forearm or lower back (P > 0.05).

Conclusion:

Delayed-onset muscle soreness was shown to have no effect on the inhibitory pain modulation system neither locally (at the painful body part), nor remotely. Thus, OA and CPM are robust test paradigms that probably require more intense, different, or prolonged pain to be modulated.