'Diffuse noxious inhibitory controls' (DNIC), a form of supraspinal descending endogenous analgesia, requires a noxious conditioning stimulus for pain attenuation. This may be partly dependent on a distraction effect. The term "conditioned pain modulation" (CPM) has recently been introduced to describe the psychophysical paradigm to test DNIC. The present study aimed to determine whether distraction and tonic heat stimulation inhibit pain through the same or different mechanisms by looking at whether there is a similar or even an additive effect on pain attenuation. Test pain was brief heat stimulation applied to the left volar of 34 healthy volunteers. For conditioning, the right hand was immersed in 46.5 degrees C water. Distraction was provided by three different difficulty levels of continuous cognitive visual tasks. Experimental blocks consisted of test pain: (1) alone; 'baseline', (2) with conditioning pain; 'CPM', (3) with distraction; 'distraction' and (4) with conditioning pain and distraction; 'combined'. They were randomized and repeated three times and pain intensity and unpleasantness rated. Results showed an overall effect of experimental block on test pain intensity (P=0.0125). Post-hoc tests revealed a significant reduction in pain intensity ratings under Combined (21.2+/-2.3; mean+/-SEM) compared to CPM alone (16.0+/-2.3) (P<0.05). Furthermore, at all levels of distraction there were always a few subjects who were not distracted despite expressing CPM. Based on the additive effect of CPM and distraction on pain inhibition, and the cases of no distraction despite CPM, we suggest that CPM acts independently from distraction.
Expectations modulate the subjective experience of pain by increasing sensitivity to nociceptive inputs, an effect mediated by brain regions such as the insula. However, it is still unknown whether the neural structures underlying pain expectancy hold sensory-specific information or, alternatively, code for modality-independent features (eg, unpleasantness), potentially common with other negative experiences. We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate neural activity underlying the expectation of different, but comparably unpleasant, pain and disgust. We presented participants with visual cues predicting either a painful heat or disgusting odor, and assessed how they affected the subsequent subjective experience of stimuli from the same (within-modality) or opposite (cross-modal) modality. We found a reliable influence of expectancy on the subjective experience of stimuli whose modality matched that of the previous cue. At the brain level, this effect was mediated by the intermediate dysgranular section of the insula, whereas it was suppressed by more anterior agranular portions of the same region. Instead, no expectancy modulation was observed when the modality of the cue differed from that of the subsequent stimulus. Our data suggest that the insular cortex encodes prospective aversive events in terms of their modality-specific features, and whether they match with subsequent stimulations.
Objective: Pain undertreatment, or oligoanalgesia, is frequent in the emergency department (ED), with major medical, ethical, and financial implications. Across different hospitals, healthcare providers have been reported to differ considerably in the ways in which they recognise and manage pain, with some prescribing analgesics far less frequently than others. However, factors that could explain this variability remain poorly understood. Here, we used neuroscience approaches for neural signal modelling to investigate whether individual decisions in the ED could be explained in terms of brain patterns related to empathy, risk-taking, and error monitoring. Methods: For 15 months, we monitored the pain management behaviour of 70 ED nurses at triage, and subsequently invited 33 to a neuroimaging study involving three well-established tasks probing relevant cognitive and affective dimensions. Univariate and multivariate regressions were used to predict pain management decisions from neural activity during these tasks. Results: We found that the brain signal recorded when empathising with others predicted the frequency with which nurses documented pain in their patients. In addition, neural activity sensitive to errors and negative outcomes predicted the frequency with which nurses denied analgesia by registering potential side-effects. Conclusions: These results highlight the multiple processes underlying pain management, and suggest that the neural representations of others' states and one's errors play a key role in individual treatment decisions. Neuroscience models of social cognition and decision-making are a powerful tool to explain clinical behaviour and might be used to guide future educational programs to improve pain management in ED.
Embodied models suggest that moral judgments are strongly intertwined with first-hand somatic experiences, with some pointing to disgust, and others arguing for a role of pain/harm. Both disgust and pain are unpleasant, arousing experiences, with strong relevance for survival, but with distinctive sensory qualities and neural channels. Hence, it is unclear whether moral cognition interacts with sensory-specific properties of one somatic experience or with supramodal dimensions common to both. Across two experiments, participants evaluated ethical dilemmas and subsequently were exposed to disgusting (olfactory) or painful (thermal) stimulations of matched unpleasantness. We found that moral scenarios enhanced physiological and neural activity to subsequent disgust (but not pain), as further supported by an independently validated whole-brain signature of olfaction. This effect was mediated by activity in the posterior cingulate cortex triggered by dilemma judgments. Our results thus speak in favor of an association between moral cognition and sensory-specific properties of disgust.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.