The purpose of this systematic review was to summarize and critically appraise the results of 10 years of human laboratory research on pain and sex/gender. An electronic search strategy was designed by a medical librarian and conducted in multiple databases. A total of 172 articles published between 1998 and 2008 were retrieved, analyzed, and synthesized. The first set of results (122 articles), which is presented in this paper, examined sex difference in the perception of laboratory-induced thermal, pressure, ischemic, muscle, electrical, chemical, and visceral pain in healthy subjects. This review suggests that females (F) and males (M) have comparable thresholds for cold and ischemic pain, while pressure pain thresholds are lower in F than M. There is strong evidence that F tolerate less thermal (heat, cold) and pressure pain than M but it is not the case for tolerance to ischemic pain, which is comparable in both sexes. The majority of the studies that measured pain intensity and unpleasantness showed no sex difference in many pain modalities. In summary, 10 years of laboratory research have not been successful in producing a clear and consistent pattern of sex differences in human pain sensitivity, even with the use of deep, tonic, long-lasting stimuli, which are known to better mimic clinical pain. Whether laboratory studies in healthy subjects are the best paradigm to investigate sex differences in pain perception is open to question and should be discussed with a view to enhancing the clinical relevance of these experiments and developing new research avenues.

Neuropathic pain (NeP), generated by disorders of the peripheral and central nervous system, can be particularly severe and disabling. Prevalence estimates indicate that 2% to 3% of the population in the developed world suffer from NeP, which suggests that up to one million Canadians have this disabling condition. Evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological management of NeP are therefore urgently needed. Randomized, controlled trials, systematic reviews and existing guidelines focusing on the pharmacological management of NeP were evaluated at a consensus meeting. Medications are recommended in the guidelines if their analgesic efficacy was supported by at least one methodologically sound, randomized, controlled trial showing significant benefit relative to placebo or another relevant control group. Recommendations for treatment are based on degree of evidence of analgesic efficacy, safety, ease of use and cost-effectiveness. Analgesic agents recommended for first-line treatments are certain antidepressants (tricyclics) and anticonvulsants (gabapentin and pregabalin). Second-line treatments recommended are serotonin noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors and topical lidocaine. Tramadol and controlled-release opioid analgesics are recommended as third-line treatments for moderate to severe pain. Recommended fourth-line treatments include cannabinoids, methadone and anticonvulsants with lesser evidence of efficacy, such as lamotrigine, topiramate and valproic acid. Treatment must be individualized for each patient based on efficacy, side-effect profile and drug accessibility, including cost. Further studies are required to examine head-to-head comparisons among analgesics, combinations of analgesics, long-term outcomes, and treatment of pediatric and central NeP.

This systematic review summarizes the results of 10 years of laboratory research on pain and sex/gender. An electronic search strategy was designed by a medical librarian to access multiple databases. A total of 172 articles published between 1998 and 2008 were retrieved, analyzed, and synthesized. The second set of results presented in this review (129 articles) examined various biopsychosocial factors that may contribute to differences in pain sensitivity between healthy women and men. The results revealed that the involvement of hormonal and physiological factors is either inconsistent or absent. Some studies suggest that temporal summation, allodynia, and secondary hyperalgesia may be more pronounced in women than in men. The evidence to support less efficient endogenous pain inhibitory systems in women is mixed and does not necessarily apply to all pain modalities. With regard to psychological factors, depression may not mediate sex differences in pain perception, while the role of anxiety is ambiguous. Cognitive and social factors appear to partly explain some sex-related differences. Finally, past individual history may be influential in female pain responses. However, these conclusions must be treated with much circumspection for various methodological reasons. Furthermore, some factors/mechanisms remain understudied in the field. There is also a need to assess and improve the ecological validity of findings from laboratory studies on healthy subjects, and perhaps a change of paradigm needs to be considered at this point in time to better understand the factors that influence the experience of women and men who suffer from acute or chronic pain.

Canadian MPTFs are unable to meet clinical demands of patients suffering from chronic pain, both in terms of regional accessibility and reasonable wait time for patients' first appointment.