Affective modulation of eyeblink reactions to noxious sural nerve stimulation: A supraspinal measure of nociceptive reactivity?☆

Williams, Amy E.; Rhudy, Jamie L.

doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2007.08.006

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 87 publications

(143 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings are consistent with other ECON studies that measured nociceptive reactions to noxious sural nerve stimulation. [12][13][14]17,48 In those studies, similar modulation was observed for the NFR, SCR, HR acceleration, pain report, and eyeblinks.The present study extends this research and demonstrates that ECON also modulates trigeminal nociceptive processes. However, it is unknown to what degree our results can be compared with research on emotional modulation of "startle" eyeblinks evoked by non-noxious auditory, 45,49 visual, 50 or somatosensory 51 stimuli, except that startle eyeblinks are modulated in a parallel manner by emotion.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 68%

“…Linear trends (associated with emotional valence/pleasure) explained 51% of the variance in pain ratings and 25% of the variance in nociceptive blinks. These findings are consistent with other ECON studies that measured nociceptive reactions to noxious sural nerve stimulation 12‐14,17,48 . In those studies, similar modulation was observed for the NFR, SCR, HR acceleration, pain report, and eyeblinks.…”

supporting

confidence: 91%

“…These effects were large, with emotion explaining as much as 62% of the variance in subjective pain and 43% of the variance in NFR. Moreover, it appears that emotional intensity is important to engage supraspinal modulation, because high arousal pictures (erotica, attack scenes), but not low arousal pictures (food, loss/grieving) led to changes in nociception/pain 17,18 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, it appears that emotional intensity is important to engage supraspinal modulation, because high arousal pictures (erotica, attack scenes), but not low arousal pictures (food, loss/grieving) led to changes in nociception/pain. 17,18 At this time it is unknown whether ECON modulates trigeminal nociception, because ECON studies have only examined nociception evoked by sural nerve stimulation (in order to measure the NFR). However, cognitive-affective processes are known to influence head and craniofacial pain.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Supraspinal Modulation of Trigeminal Nociception and Pain

Williams

Rhudy

2009

Headache

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 68%

supporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Supraspinal Modulation of Trigeminal Nociception and Pain

Williams

Rhudy

2009

Headache

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…45 Nociceptive inputs to the dorsal horn of the spinal cord are also influenced by potent endogenous descending inhibitory and facilitatory processes from supraspinal regions. This bidirectional, central control incorporates a frontal, limbic, brainstem, and spinal cord neuronexus [46][47][48][49] that is driven primarily by noxious inputs and associated emotional responses.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cervical Referral of Head Pain in Migraineurs: Effects on the Nociceptive Blink Reflex

Watson

Drummond

2014

Headache

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective.-To investigate cervical, interictal reproduction of usual head pain and its effect on the nociceptive blink reflex in migraineurs.Background.-Anatomical and neurophysiological studies in animals and humans have confirmed functional convergence of trigeminal and cervical afferent pathways. Migraineurs often present with occipital and neck symptoms, and cervical pain is referred to the head in most cases, suggesting that cervical afferent information may contribute to headache. Furthermore, the effectiveness of greater occipital nerve blockade in migraine and demonstrable modulation of trigeminal transmission following greater occipital nerve blockade suggest an important role for cervical afferents in migraine. However, to what extent cervical afferents contribute actively to migraine is still unknown.Methods.-The passive accessory intervertebral movements of the atlanto-occipital and C2-3 spinal segments of 15 participants (14 females, 1 male; age 24-44 years, mean age 33.3 years) with migraine were examined interictally. During 1 session, either the atlanto-occipital or C2-3 segment was examined, resulting in referred usual head pain, while in another session, pressure was applied over the common extensor origin (lateral epicondyle of the humerus) of the ipsilateral arm. Each intervention was repeated 4 times. The nociceptive blink reflex to a supraorbital electrical stimulus was elicited ipsilaterally during both sessions before and during each intervention. The main outcome variables were the number of recorded blinks, area under the curve and latencies of the R2 components of the nociceptive blink reflex. Participants also rated the intensity of referred head pain and the supraorbital stimulus on a scale of 0-10, where 0 = "no pain" and 10 = "intolerable pain," and rated the intensity of applied pressure where 0 = "pressure but no pain" and 10 = "intolerable pain."Results.-Participants reported a significant reduction in local tenderness ratings across the 4 trials for the cervical intervention but not for the arm (P = .005). The cervical intervention evoked head pain in all participants. As the cervical intervention was sustained, head pain decreased significantly from the beginning to the end of each trial (P = .000) and from the beginning of the first trial to the end of the last (P = .000). Pain evoked by the supraorbital stimulus was consistent from baseline to across the 4 trials (P = .635) and was similar for the cervical and arm interventions (P = .072). The number of blinks decreased significantly across the experiment (P = .000) and was comparable in the cervical and arm interventions (P = .624). While the R2 area under the curve decreased irrespective of intervention (P = .000), this reduction was significantly greater for the cervical intervention than when pressure was applied to the arm (P = .037). Analysis of the R2 latencies revealed a notable increase across the experiment (P = .037). However, this increase was significantly greater following the cervical than arm intervention (P ...

show abstract