A technique for rapid, reliable assessment of thermal-pain threshold in humans

Perkins, Kenneth A.; Grobe, James E.; Jennings, J. Richard; Epstein, Leonard H.; Elash, Celeste A.

doi:10.3758/bf03203471

Cited by 9 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous work has shown that thermal stimulation methods produce reliable behavioral responding (Hardy, Wolff, & Goodell, 1952; Kenshalo, Anton, & Dubner, 1989; Perkins, Grobe, Jennings, Epstein, & Elash, 1992). Lee and Stitzer (1995) further showed the reliability of this particular procedure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral measurement of thermal pain sensitivity in humans: Effects of stimulus intensity and instructions.

Greenwald¹,

Johanson²

2001

Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study validated a human behavioral model of thermal nociception analogous to the rodent tail-flick assay. Effects of instructions and stimulus intensity on behavior (i.e., finger withdrawal latency) were evaluated. Using a repeated measures randomized crossover design, the authors exposed 10 volunteers to varying radiant heat intensities (from 42.2 to 52.2 degrees C) during each of four sessions. In the different sessions, participants were told to remove their finger when they felt heat, felt unpleasant, felt pain, or could no longer tolerate pain. Withdrawal latencies significantly decreased as stimulus intensity increased and significantly increased for sensory, affective, pain, and intolerance instructions. Instruction set differences were significantly larger at higher stimulus intensities. This technique may be useful in human psychopharmacological research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Behavioral measurement of thermal pain sensitivity in humans: Effects of stimulus intensity and instructions.

Greenwald¹,

Johanson²

2001

Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The present studies compared pain detection of smokers and nonsmokers in response to measured doses of nicotine administered by nasal spray, which was used to standardize nicotine exposure (Perkins et al, 1986; Perkins, Epstein, Stiller, Marks, & Jacob, 1989). Thermal, or radiant heat, pain was used because it appears to produce little adaptation across presentations (Hardy, Wolff, & Goodell, 1952; Kenshalo, Anton, & Dubner, 1989) and, therefore, may be more reliable (Perkins, Grobe, Jennings, Epstein, & Elash, 1992). Pain detection, rather than endurance, was examined because it is less likely to cause tissue damage and may also be less subject to adaptation across frequent, repeated assessments of pain sensitivity before and after acute drug exposure manipulations (Beecher, 1959; Chapman et al, 1985).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of nicotine on thermal pain detection in humans.

Perkins¹,

Grobe²,

Stiller³

et al. 1994

Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pain detection threshold (latency in seconds) was repeatedly assessed by a standardized, computer-controlled radiant heat stimulus applied to the skin before and after nicotine intake in 3 studies of smokers and nonsmokers. Placebo or doses of nicotine corrected for body weight were administered by measured-dose nasal spray. Nicotine increased pain latency (i.e., decreased pain sensitivity) significantly in each study, although effects were modest and somewhat inconsistent. Nicotine had no effect on skin temperature at the site of stimulation, arguing against an indirect effect on nociception through peripheral cardiovascular changes. Overall, there were no significant differences as a result of smoking status, indicating that nicotine's influence on pain sensitivity is a "true" drug effect and is not due to withdrawal relief. These findings suggest that nicotine produces an antinociceptive effect in humans, but its relationship to nicotine reinforcement is unclear.

show abstract

“…However, while there is considerable research on the reliability of PPTs, there is little on the reliability of thermal pain thresholds. That which has been conducted has predominantly focused on response to heatinduced pain and utilised Pearson's r as a reliability measure [22,23]. Perkins et al [23], however, found considerable within-subject variability in heat pain thresholds.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That which has been conducted has predominantly focused on response to heatinduced pain and utilised Pearson's r as a reliability measure [22,23]. Perkins et al [23], however, found considerable within-subject variability in heat pain thresholds. Such a result indicates the potential benefit of using ICC and CV in future studies of thermal pain reliability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reliability Of Pain Threshold Measurement In Young Adults

Cathcart

Pritchard

2005

IJPSP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionPrevious reports have demonstrated high intra-and interrater reliability for assessment of pressure pain thresholds (PPT) in clinical [1][2][3][4] and healthy subjects [5][6][7][8][9][10][11]. However, many of the earlier reliability analyses used Pearson's r correlation coefficient [e.g.; 5, 9-11]. Pearson's r is a measure of association, but is not appropriate for assessing agreement between raters or ratings, as it is not sensitive to systematic bias between raters (or ratings) [12][13][14]. The intra-class correlation (ICC) is a more appropriate measure as it is sensitive to systematic bias. The ICC can provide a measure of absolute agreement between raters, which answers the question of whether raters or ratings are interchangeable [12][13][14]. The coefficient of repeatability (CR), specified as 2 standard deviations of the mean test-retest differences [14], provides an estimate of retest ranges expressed in the measurement units. Hence, 95% of repeat measurements for the sample will be in the range: mean difference±CR. The coefficient of variation (CV) is specified as half of the CR expressed as a percentage of the mean [14]. ICC, CR and CV therefore provide complementary information on reliability.More recently, some studies of PPT reliability have used ICC to confirm reliability assessed by analogue algometers [15], electronic algometers [7,16] Stuart Cathcart Donald PritchardAbstract The objective was to examine reliability of pressure and thermal (cold) pain threshold assessment in persons less than 25 years of age, using intra-class correlation (ICC) and coefficients of repeatability and variability. We measured thresholds to pain from pressure algometry and ice placed at the hand and head in 10 healthy volunteers aged 18-25. Intra-rater reliability was examined with ICC. Coefficients of repeatability (CR) and variability (CV) were estimated. Reliability of repeat assessments was high as assessed by ICC, although coefficients of repeatability and variation indicated considerable inter-individual variation in repeat measurements. Pressure algometry and strategically placed ice appear to be reliable techniques for assessing pain processing in young adults. Reliability studies employing ICC may benefit from complementary estimation of CR and CV.

show abstract

A technique for rapid, reliable assessment of thermal-pain threshold in humans

Cited by 9 publications

References 16 publications

Behavioral measurement of thermal pain sensitivity in humans: Effects of stimulus intensity and instructions.

Behavioral measurement of thermal pain sensitivity in humans: Effects of stimulus intensity and instructions.

Effects of nicotine on thermal pain detection in humans.

Reliability Of Pain Threshold Measurement In Young Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About