• Hadas Grouper, Elon Eisenberg, and Dorit Pud.
• Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, University of Haifa, Israel. Electronic address: hasetano@campus.haifa.ac.il.
• Neurosci. Lett. 2019 Aug 24; 708: 134333.

BackgroundThe relationship between sensitivity to pain and conditioned pain modulation (CPM) - a paradigm reflecting the activity of the endogenous descending analgesic system - is still unclear. This study aimed at investigating CPM magnitude in two distinct subgroups of healthy subjects, presenting low vs. high sensitivity to pain (LSP vs. HSP, respectively), by employing two different thermal paradigms of CPM.MethodNinety-five healthy subjects (out of 293 tested) were identified as LSP (n = 48) or HSP (n = 47) according to their tolerance time to noxious cold stimulation (Cold Pressor Test, 1 °C). All subjects were exposed to two different paradigms of CPM: 1) Fixed temperature 'test-pain' (TP) where phasic, fixed painful heat stimuli of 47 °C were administered before and during a prolonged 'conditioning stimulus' (cold water at 12 °C for 30 s); and 2) Individually based 'pain-60' where TP was determined as the temperature that induced pain at a magnitude of 60 on a 0-100 rating scale (with the same conditioning stimulus).ResultUsing both thermal paradigms, LSP subjects showed decreased CPM magnitudes in comparison to HSP (p < 0.0001 in both paradigms). Within each group, no differences in the magnitudes of CPM were found between the two paradigms.ConclusionThese findings show that regardless of the thermal CPM paradigm employed, healthy individuals exhibiting low sensitivity to pain have a low pain inhibition profile and vice-versa. It is suggested that in healthy subjects, pain sensitivity predisposes the magnitude of CPM and not the other way around.Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

17 keywords...

hide…