The journal of pain : official journal of the American Pain Society
-
Lumbopelvic pain is common in pregnancy but the sensitization factors underlying the condition are largely unknown. This study characterized the somatosensory profile of pregnant and nonpregnant women and the relationship between pain, hypersensitivity, and commonly used manual clinical tests. Thirty-nine pregnant and 22 nonpregnant women were included. Although lumbopelvic pain was not an inclusion criterion, the pregnant women were divided into low- and high-pain groups following data collection. The sensitivity to light brush, pin-prick, and pressure pain was assessed bilaterally at 3 sites in the lumbopelvic region, at the shoulder, and in the lower leg. Responses to the active straight leg raise test and pain provocation tests of the sacroiliac joint were recorded. Participants completed questionnaires addressing emotional and physical well-being and rated disability using the Pelvic Girdle Questionnaire. Compared with controls, the high-pain group rated the active straight leg raise test as more difficult (P < .05), and both pain groups had more positive pain provocation tests (P < .05). The pregnant groups demonstrated significantly lower pressure pain thresholds at most assessment sites compared with controls (P < .05), but self-reported disability and pain were not correlated with pressure pain thresholds within pregnant participants. The high-pain group reported worse emotional health and poorer sleep quality than controls (P < .05). ⋯ This article presents the somatosensory profile of a healthy pregnant cohort. The results indicate that pain sensitivity increases during pregnancy possibly owing to the physical changes the body undergoes during pregnancy but also owing to changes in emotional health. This should be accounted for in clinical management of pregnant women with lumbopelvic pain.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Can experimentally induced positive affect attenuate generalization of fear of movement-related pain?
Recent experimental data show that associative learning processes are involved not only in the acquisition but also in the spreading of pain-related fear. Clinical studies suggest involvement of positive affect in resilience against chronic pain. Surprisingly, the role of positive affect in associative learning in general, and in fear generalization in particular, has received scant attention. In a voluntary movement paradigm, in which one arm movement (reinforced conditioned stimulus [CS+]) was followed by a painful stimulus and another was not (unreinforced conditioned stimulus [CS-]), we tested generalization of fear inhibition in response to 5 novel but related generalization movements (GSs; within-subjects) after either a positive affect induction or a control exercise (Group = between-subjects) in healthy participants (N = 50). The GSs' similarity with the original CS+ movement and CS- movement varied. Fear learning was assessed via verbal ratings. Results indicated that there was an interaction between the increase in positive affect and the linear generalization gradient. Stronger increases in positive affect were associated with steeper generalization curves because of relatively lower pain-unconditioned stimulus expectancy and less fear of stimuli more similar to the CS-. There was no Group by Stimulus interaction. Results thus suggest that positive affect may enhance safety learning through promoting generalization from known safe movements to novel yet related movements. Improved safety learning may be a central mechanism underlying the association between positive affect and increased resilience against chronic pain. ⋯ We investigated the extent to which positive affect influences the generalization (ie, spreading) of pain-related fear inhibition in response to situations similar to the original, pain-eliciting situation. Results suggest that increasing positive affect in the acute pain stage may limit the spreading of pain-related fear, thereby potentially inhibiting transition to chronic pain conditions.
-
Skin temperature changes due to vasomotor disturbances are important features of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Because this phenomenon has only been studied under controlled conditions, information on daily circadian variability is lacking. Also, studies in chronic CRPS patients with abnormal posturing, in which coldness of the affected extremity is more common, do not exist. We examined the response to external heating as well as circadian temperature changes over several days in the affected legs of 14 chronic CRPS patients with abnormal posturing and 17 controls. Skin temperatures were recorded hourly for 14 days using wireless sensors. Although the patients' affected extremities were significantly colder before external heating, the vasodilatory response was similar in the 2 groups. Additionally, median skin temperature differences between both legs and their variability was larger in patients than in controls during the day, but not during the night. These findings indicate that the mechanisms underlying impaired skin circulation in CRPS during daytime are reversible under certain circumstances. The large variation in skin temperature differences during the day questions the validity of using a single measurement in the diagnosis of CRPS, and our results indicate that only temperature differences >1.0 °C should be considered to reflect vasomotor disturbances. ⋯ This article shows that chronic CRPS patients have a normal vasodilatory response to external heating and that skin temperature differences between the affected and unaffected lower limbs, which were highly variable during daytime, disappeared during sleep. This indicates that part of the vasomotor regulation in these patients is still functional.
-
Chronic neuropathic pain is often difficult to treat with current pain medications. Gene therapy is presently being explored as a therapeutic approach for the treatment of neuropathic and cancer pain. In this study, we sought to use an injury-specific promoter to deliver the mu-opioid receptor (MOR) transgene such that expression would occur during the injured state only in response to release of injury-specific galanin. To determine whether an injury-specific promoter can produce neuron-specific MOR expression and enhanced antinociception, we compared animals infected with a galanin promoter virus (galMOR) or a human cytomegalovirus promoter virus (cmvMOR). In behavioral assays, we found an earlier onset and a larger magnitude of antinociception in animals infected with galMOR compared with cmvMOR. Immunohistochemical analysis of dorsal root ganglion neurons revealed a significant increase in MOR-positive staining in cmvMOR- and galMOR-treated mice. Spinal cord sections from galMOR-treated mice showed a greater increase in density but not area of MOR-positive staining. These results suggest that using injury-specific promoters to drive gene expression in primary afferent neurons can influence the onset and magnitude of antinociception in a rodent model of neuropathic pain and can be used to upregulate MOR expression in populations of neurons that are potentially injury specific. ⋯ An injury-specific promoter (galMOR) was used to drive MOR expression in a population- and injury-specific manner. GalMOR increased antinociception and density of MOR staining in the spinal cord. This article presents evidence that promoter selection is an important component in successful gene expression in an injury- and population-specific manner.
-
Review
Reporting of sample size calculations in analgesic clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review.
Sample size calculations determine the number of participants required to have sufficiently high power to detect a given treatment effect. In this review, we examined the reporting quality of sample size calculations in 172 publications of double-blind randomized controlled trials of noninvasive pharmacologic or interventional (ie, invasive) pain treatments published in European Journal of Pain, Journal of Pain, and Pain from January 2006 through June 2013. Sixty-five percent of publications reported a sample size calculation but only 38% provided all elements required to replicate the calculated sample size. In publications reporting at least 1 element, 54% provided a justification for the treatment effect used to calculate sample size, and 24% of studies with continuous outcome variables justified the variability estimate. Publications of clinical pain condition trials reported a sample size calculation more frequently than experimental pain model trials (77% vs 33%, P < .001) but did not differ in the frequency of reporting all required elements. No significant differences in reporting of any or all elements were detected between publications of trials with industry and nonindustry sponsorship. Twenty-eight percent included a discrepancy between the reported number of planned and randomized participants. This study suggests that sample size calculation reporting in analgesic trial publications is usually incomplete. Investigators should provide detailed accounts of sample size calculations in publications of clinical trials of pain treatments, which is necessary for reporting transparency and communication of pre-trial design decisions. ⋯ In this systematic review of analgesic clinical trials, sample size calculations and the required elements (eg, treatment effect to be detected; power level) were incompletely reported. A lack of transparency regarding sample size calculations may raise questions about the appropriateness of the calculated sample size.