Experimental pressure-pain assessments: Test-retest reliability, convergence and dimensionality

Abstract

Introduction Experimental pain studies can provide unique insight into the dimensions of pain and into individual differences in pain responsiveness by controlling different aspects of pain-eliciting stimuli and pain measures. In experimental pain studies, pain responsiveness can be assessed as pain threshold, pain tolerance or pain ratings. The test-theoretical qualities of these different measures, however, have not yet been completely documented. In the current study, several of these qualities were investigated in a pain experiment applying different algometric techniques. The objective of the study was to investigate the reliability (test-retest) and the convergent validity (correspondence) of the different methods found in the literature of measuring pressure-pain threshold, and the interrelationship between pressure-pain threshold, pressure-pain tolerance, and pressure-pain ratings. Methods Sixty-six healthy female subjects were enrolled in the study. All pressure stimuli were applied by a trained investigator, using a digital algometer with a 1 cm2 rubber tip. Pressure-pain thresholds were assessed repeatedly on six different body points (i.e. left and right calf one third of total calf muscle length below the popliteal space), the lower back (5 cm left and right from the L3), and left and right forearm (thickest part of brachioradialis muscle). Next, pressure-pain tolerance was measured on the thumbnail of the non-dominant hand, followed by rating affective and sensory components (on visual analogue scales) of a stimulus at tolerance level. Last, affective and sensory ratings were obtained for two pressure intensities. Results With intraclass correlations above .75 for pain responses per body point, test-retest reliability was found to be good. However, values obtained from all first measurements were significantly higher as compared with the two succeeding ones. Convergent validity of pain thresholds across different body points was found to be high for all combinations assessed (Cronbach's alpha values >.80), but the highest for bilateral similar body parts (>.89). Finally, principal components analysis including measures of threshold, tolerance and pain ratings yielded a three-factor solution that explained 81.9% of the variance: Moderate-level stimulus appraisal & pain tolerance; Pain threshold; Tolerance-level stimulus appraisal. Conclusion and implications Findings of the current study were used to formulate recommendations for future algometric pain studies. Concerning pressure-pain threshold, it is recommended to exclude first measurements for every body point from further analyses, as these measurements were found to be consistently higher compared with the following measurements. Further, no more than two consecutive measurements (after the first measurement) are needed for a reliable mean threshold value per body point. When combining threshold values of several body points into one mean-aggregated threshold value, we suggest to combine bilateral similar points, as convergent validity values w...

Abnormal Quantitative Sensory Testing is Associated With Persistent Pain One Year After TKA

“…Pressure pain threshold was measured using a digital pressure algometer (Somedic, Sweden), a device that is recognized as a valid and reliable measure when used by a trained assessor [22,28,33]. Standard method and instructions were used [26].…”

Test-retest reliability of pain-related functional brain connectivity compared with pain self-report

“…Importantly, TRR places an upper limit on validity. Whereas the TRR of self-reported pain has been extensively examined in clinical measures [12,16,25,36], there are presently no studies of pain neural markers that report information about TRR. In fact, very few studies have even examined TRR related simply to fMRI findings about pain processing.…”

Negative affectivity predicts decreased pain tolerance during low-grade inflammation in healthy women

“…Although pain threshold and pain tolerance are both considered measures of pain sensitivity, there is evidence that they represent different processes: An earlier study using the same pain assessment methodology showed that pain tolerance is only modestly correlated to pain threshold (r % .40) but moderately related to subjective sensory and affective pain ratings (r % .60) (Lacourt et al, 2012). Pain threshold on the other hand showed low correlations with pain ratings (r % .30).…”

“…These algometric pain sensitivity measures showed good testretest reliability for tests repeated within one session (intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) > .80) (Lacourt et al, 2012;Potter et al, 2006) and over days (ICC > .70) (Potter et al, 2006).…”

“…The procedure for assessing pressure pain sensitivity has been described elsewhere (Lacourt et al, 2012). Briefly, a pressure was applied and gradually increased at a rate of 100 kPa/s until the participant indicated the force to become unpleasant (for pain threshold) or unbearable (for pain tolerance), upon which the pressure was released.…”