Beep tones attenuate pain following Pavlovian conditioning of an endogenous pain control mechanism

Endogenous Pain Modulation Induced by Extrinsic and Intrinsic Psychological Threat in Healthy Individuals

Many factors interact to influence threat perception and the subsequent experience of pain. This study investigated the effect of observing pain (extrinsic threat) and intrinsic threat of pain to oneself on pressure pain threshold (PPT). Forty socially connected pairs of healthy volunteers were threat-primed and randomly allocated to experimental or control roles. An experimental pain modulation paradigm was applied, with non-nociceptive threat cues used as conditioning stimuli. In substudy 1, the extrinsic threat to the experimental participant was observation of the control partner in pain. The control participant underwent hand immersion in noxious and non-noxious water baths in randomized order. Change in the observing participant's PPT from baseline to mid- and postimmersion was calculated. A significant interaction was found for PPT between conditions and test time (F_2,78 = 24.9, P < .005). PPT increased by 23.6% ± 19.3% between baseline and during hand immersion (F_1,39 = 43.7, P < .005). Substudy 2 investigated threat of imminent pain to self. After a 15-minute break, the experimental participant's PPT was retested ("baseline 2"). Threat was primed by suggestion of whole arm immersion in an icier, larger water bath. PPT was tested immediately before anticipated arm immersion, after which the experiment ended. A significant increase in PPT between "baseline 2" and "pre-immersion" was seen (t = -7.6, P = .005), a pain modulatory effect of 25.8 ± 20.7%. Extrinsic and intrinsic threat of pain, in the absence of any afferent input therefore influences pain modulation. This may need to be considered in studies that use noxious afferent input with populations who show dysfunctional pain modulation.

PERSPECTIVE

The effect on endogenous analgesia of observing another's pain and of threat of pain to oneself was investigated. Extrinsic as well as intrinsic threat cues, in the absence of any afferent input, increased pain thresholds, suggesting that mere threat of pain may initiate analgesic effects in traditional noxious experimental paradigms.

The effect of heterotopic noxious conditioning stimulation on Aδ-, C- and Aβ-fibre brain responses in humans

Human studies have shown that heterotopic nociceptive conditioning stimulation (HNCS) applied to a given body location reduces the percept and brain responses elicited by noxious test stimuli delivered at a remote body location. It remains unclear to what extent this effect of HNCS relies on the spinal-bulbar-spinal loop mediating the effect of diffuse noxious inhibitory controls (DNICs) described in animals, and/or on top-down cortical mechanisms modulating nociception. Importantly, some studies have examined the effects of HNCS on the brain responses to nociceptive input conveyed by Aδ-fibres. In contrast, no studies have explored the effects of HNCS on the responses to selective nociceptive C-fibre input and non-nociceptive Aβ-fibre input. In this study, we measured the intensity of perception and event-related potentials (ERPs) to stimuli activating Aδ-, C- and Aβ-fibres, before, during and after HNCS, obtained by immersing one foot in painful cold water. We observed that (i) the perceived intensity of nociceptive Aδ- and C-stimuli was reduced during HNCS, and (ii) the ERPs elicited by Aδ- and Aβ- and C-stimuli were also reduced during HNCS. Importantly, because Aβ-ERPs are related to primary afferents that ascend directly through the dorsal columns without being relayed at spinal level, the modulation of these responses may not be explained by an influence of descending projections modulating the transmission of nociceptive input at spinal level. Therefore, our results indicate that, in humans, HNCS should be used with caution as a direct measure of DNIC-related mechanisms.