Negative expectations interfere with the analgesic effect of safety cues on pain perception by priming the cortical representation of pain in the midcingulate cortex

Almarzouki, Abeer F; Brown, Christopher; Brown, Richard J.; Leung, Matthew Hong Kay; Jones, Anthony K.P.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0180006

Cited by 12 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This was 267-450ms post-stimulus for the EEP, and 410-645ms for the LEP. Though the LEP latencies are late, similar latencies have been reported in previous studies in response to both CO 2 (Brown, El-Deredy, & Jones, 2014) and thulium laser stimulation (Almarzouki, Brown, Brown, Leung, & Jones, 2017). Each participant’s maximum within this latency was identified, and ±40ms window was extracted around this, to include the peak of the maximum.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 87%

A comparison between the neural correlates of laser and electric pain stimulation and their modulation by expectation

Hird¹,

Talmi²,

Jones³

et al. 2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPain is modulated by expectation. Event-related potential (ERP) studies of the influence of expectation on pain typically utilise laser heat stimulation to provide a controllable nociceptive-specific stimulus. Short painful electric stimulation has a number of practical advantages, but is less nociceptive-specific. We compared the modulation of electric versus laser-evoked pain by expectation, and their corresponding pain-evoked and anticipatory ERPs.New MethodWe developed understanding of recognised methods of laser and electric stimulation. We tested whether pain perception and neural activity induced by electric stimulation was modulated by expectation, whether this expectation elicited anticipatory neural correlates, and how these measures compared to those associated with laser stimulation. We elicited cue-evoked expectations of high and low pain and compared subjective ratings and corresponding ERPs in response to the delivery of laser and electric stimulation in a within-participant design.ResultsDespite sensory and affective differences between laser and electric pain, intensity ratings and pain-evoked potentials were modulated equivalently by expectation, though ERPs only correlated with pain ratings in the laser pain condition. Anticipatory correlates significantly differentiated pain intensity expectation to laser but not electric pain.Comparison with Existing MethodPrevious studies have consistently shown that laser-evoked potentials are modulated by expectation. We extend this by showing electric pain-evoked potentials are equally modulated by expectation, within the same participants. We also show a difference between the pain types in anticipation.ConclusionsThough laser-evoked potentials express a stronger relationship with pain perception, both laser and electric stimulation may be used to study the modulation of pain-evoked potentials by expectation. Anticipatory-evoked potentials are elicited by both pain types, but they may reflect different processes and did not correlate with pain perception.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 87%

A comparison between the neural correlates of laser and electric pain stimulation and their modulation by expectation

Hird¹,

Talmi²,

Jones³

et al. 2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Firstly, is pain catastrophizing characterised by magnified aversive value encoding? Secondly, do pain catastrophizers show evidence of more persistent pain expectancy (the 'prior expectancy effect' (Almarzouki et al, 2017)), which would follow if pain catastrophizing is characterised by perseverative processing of pain cues (I.e., rumination)? In addition to analysing expectancy effects on pain behaviourally, EEG analyses detail the spatiotemporal location and pattern of within-subject effects of cue valuation (visual evoked potential (VEP) responses to cues predicting high vs. low pain) and the effects of prior pain expectancy on the laser-evoked potential (LEP).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, we did not find evidence that expectancy effects on nociception and pain were more persistent in the high vs. low PC group after initially negative expectations were updated by contrary information indicating no threat of pain. We previously found that pain perception in healthy individuals undergoing a similar procedure were still influenced by expectations from the initial highly aversive cue, despite the presentation of a second cue to update expectation (the socalled 'prior expectancy effect' (Almarzouki et al, 2017)). However, in this study, although neural activity directly after aversive cues (prior to the second update cues) appeared to be more persistent over the 1.5s analysed in the high vs. low PC group, pointing to greater pain expectancy, none of the analyses (behavioural, univariate EEG or multivariate EEG) provided evidence that prior pain expectancy had a greater influence on pain and nociception in the high PC group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These processes were operationalised with respect to the transient (magnification) and persistent (rumination) effects of expectancy cues on the temporal dynamics of neural responses as participants anticipated and experienced experimental (laser) pain stimuli. This approach to perseverative expectation builds on our previous research showing that expectancy effects on nociception and pain persist even if initial expectancy cues are followed by contrary information indicating no threat of pain (the so-called 'prior expectancy effect' (Almarzouki et al, 2017)). Here we tested the hypothesis of a more persistent expectancy effect (i.e.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neural representations of aversive value encoding in pain catastrophizers

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chronic pain is exacerbated by maladaptive cognition such as pain catastrophizing (PC). Biomarkers of PC mechanisms may aid precision medicine for chronic pain. Here, we investigate EEG biomarkers using mass univariate and multivariate (machine learning) approaches. We test theoretical notions that PC results from a combination of augmented aversive-value encoding ("magnification") and persistent expectations of pain ("rumination"). Healthy individuals with high or low levels of PC underwent an experimental pain model involving nociceptive laser stimuli preceded by cues predicting forthcoming pain intensity. Analysis of EEG acquired during the cue and laser stimulation provided event-related potentials (ERPs) identifying spatially and temporally-extended neural representations associated with pain catastrophizing. Specifically, differential neural responses to cues predicting high vs. low intensity pain (i.e. aversive value encoding) were larger in the high PC group, largely originating from mid-cingulate and superior parietal cortex. Multivariate spatiotemporal EEG patterns evoked from cues with high aversive value selectively and significantly differentiated the high PC from low PC group (64.6% classification accuracy). Regression analyses revealed that neural patterns classifying groups could be partially predicted (R 2 = 28%) from those neural patterns classifying the aversive value of cues. In contrast, behavioural and EEG analyses did not provide evidence that PC modifies more persistent effects of prior expectation on pain perception and nociceptive responses. These findings support the hypothesis of magnification of aversive value encoding but not persistent expression of expectation in pain catastrophizers.Multivariate patterns of aversive value encoding provide promising biomarkers of maladaptive cognitive responses to chronic pain that have future potential for psychological treatment development and clinical stratification..

show abstract

“…• Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) [12], [24], [51], [28], [30], [31], [38], [45], [48]- [50] • NRS variations [14], [22], [27],…”

Section: Pain Perception Testmentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain Activity to Study Physical Pain: A Survey of Tools and Methods

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pain is a problem that has a significant effect on the quality of life, both personal and social, and in the knowledge of the authors. To date, there is no practical device or method that allows us to generate a quantitative pain index. In recent years, studies related to pain and its measurement have been reported, which have used brain activity as a biological marker of pain based on various methodologies. Therefore, the purpose of this survey article is to concentrate the tools and methods that use brain activity to study two types of physical pain: 1) chronic, as a result of a clinical condition; and, 2) acute physical induced by a painful stimulus. The survey analyzes the elements involved in evaluating these types of pain, considering the number of subjects, the EEG setting, the stimulus applied, the pain perception test used, the software for analysis and processing, and additional resources. The results present a systematic classification of the information; it contains the techniques and technologies that have been used for the study of pain. Finally, the article concludes identifying opportunity areas as quantitative pain measurement tools based on brain activity analysis to understand, adapt, or monitor the treatment responses.INDEX TERMS EEG pain, pain measurement, brain activity, chronic pain, acute pain.

show abstract

Negative expectations interfere with the analgesic effect of safety cues on pain perception by priming the cortical representation of pain in the midcingulate cortex

Cited by 12 publications

References 43 publications

A comparison between the neural correlates of laser and electric pain stimulation and their modulation by expectation

A comparison between the neural correlates of laser and electric pain stimulation and their modulation by expectation

Neural representations of aversive value encoding in pain catastrophizers

Brain Activity to Study Physical Pain: A Survey of Tools and Methods

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About