Psychosocial stressors and pain sensitivity in chronic pain disorder with somatic and psychological factors (F45.41)

Studer, Martina; Stewart, J.P.; Egloff, Niklaus; Zürcher, Elodie; Känel, Roland von; Brodbeck, Jeannette; Holtforth, Martin Grosse

doi:10.1007/s00482-016-0159-9

Cited by 8 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The test protocol for this study had already been used in prior studies in order to facilitate comparisons, as recommended by several reviews. 15 , 21 , 22 , 33 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This algometry protocol was used in several clinical studies evaluating hypersensitivity and hyperalgesia in chronic pain condition. 15 , 19 - 22 For testing pain pressure sensitivity, it has a well-proven internal and external validity . 19 , 20 In terms of internal validity, standardized Bland Altman repeatability coefficients were 0.96 for finger pain rating and 0.63 for ear lobe pain rating.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although analogue pain rating is the most popular pain assessment tool in research of disease-caused pain and the patients consider it the most relevant outcome, it is rare in quantitative sensory testing of pain and completely missing in investigations of age and sex differences. 13 – 15 This is puzzling, since it is easier to put a peg on a patient´s finger or ear lobe than increasing the pressure constantly with a standard handheld algometer. Experimental studies showed that human delivery of pressure varies considerably during extended applications with these devices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Age and Gender as Factors of Pressure Sensitivity of Pain-Free Persons: Are They Meaningful?

Cámara¹,

Gharbo

Egloff

2020

JPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior findings suggest that women and elderly persons are more sensitive to pressure than men and younger persons; however, the magnitudes of these differences are substantially inconsistent. We answered the question whether the higher sensitivity of women and elderly persons is quantitatively meaningful. Specifically, we investigated if it is large enough to hamper the diagnosis, classification and follow-up of pain conditions by clinicians. Materials and Methods: From each age stratum (18-20, 21-30, 31-40, 41-50, 51-60, 61-70, 71-80, and >80 years), 40 pain-free women and 40 pain-free men were recruited. They rated the intensity of pressure of ten Newtons over ten seconds on an analogue zero to ten rating scale. The pressure was applied on their middle fingers and ear lobes with a threshold algometer. Centile curves visualized the sex-and age-dependent fluctuation of pressure sensitivity. Results: Over the entire age range from 20 to 80 years, the median curves fluctuated within the interval of less than two points. The distance between the median curves of men and women was also less than two points. On the average, the median difference was half a point on the finger (p = 0.249) and the ear lobe (p = 0.083). Conclusion: Less than two points is below the minimal clinically important difference for a zero to ten analogue pain rating scale; differences smaller than one point are even below the resolution of the scale. Sex differences and age fluctuations of pressure sensitivity are negligible.

show abstract

“…The test protocol for this study had already been used in prior studies in order to facilitate comparisons, as recommended by several reviews. 15 , 21 , 22 , 33 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Age and Gender as Factors of Pressure Sensitivity of Pain-Free Persons: Are They Meaningful?

Cámara¹,

Gharbo

Egloff

2020

JPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since this test is not subject to a patent, it can be implemented and easily reproduced all over the world 43,44. The method is easy-to-administer and has been implemented in several studies 10,27,36,43–45,56. Selected by means of spring balances, the pegs used for pain provocation are set with an exact clamping force of 10N, at an extension of 5 mm (Type Algopeg, size 78×10 mm, polypropylene and nickel).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking the criteria for fibromyalgia in 2019: the ABC indicators

Stewart¹,

Mailler-Burch²,

Eic³

et al. 2019

JPR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Diagnostic criteria for fibromyalgia have been subject to debate and controversy for many years. The preliminary diagnostic criteria introduced in 2010 and 2011 have been criticized for different reasons, including questionable diagnostic specificity and a lack of an etiopathogenetic foundation. The “ABC indicators” presented in this study reflect a further development of the 2011 criteria and refer to (A) algesia, (B) bilateral, axial-symmetric pain distribution, and (C) chronic distress. Patients and methods We compared the diagnostic performance of the ABC indicators with that of the 2011 criteria by analyzing the data of 409 inpatients with chronic functional pain divided into two subgroups of pain patients: Those with whole-body pain and those with pain not involving the whole body. Under the premise that FM phenotypically represents a whole-body pain disorder, sensitivity, specificity, correct classification and diagnostic odds ratios were calculated. Results The 2011 criteria demonstrated a specificity of 68.1%, a sensitivity of 75.5%, a correct classification of 71.0% and a diagnostic odds ratio of 6.56 (CI: 4.17–10.31). The ABC indicators achieved a specificity of 88.3%, a sensitivity of 62.3%, a correct classification of 78.6%, and a diagnostic odds ratio of 12.47 (CI: 7.30–21.28). Conclusion The ABC fibromyalgia indicators demonstrated better specificity, lower sensitivity, and better overall diagnostic effectiveness than the original 2011 criteria.

show abstract

“…To our knowledge, the study by Studer et al [16] was the first to systematically investigate associations of enhanced pain sensitivity with different past and current psychosocial stressors. Studer et al [16] focused on patients with somatoform pain disorders (ICD-10, F45.41) and thereby compared the predictive value of the following stressors on pain sensitivity: potentially life-threatening accidents, war experiences, adverse childhood experiences, relationship problems, and a certified inability to work.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

War experiences and relationship problems predict pain sensitivity cross-sectionally among patients with chronic primary pain

Scheidegger

Blättler

Gubler

et al. 2023

Journal of Psychosomatic Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Psychosocial stressors and pain sensitivity in chronic pain disorder with somatic and psychological factors (F45.41)

Abstract: Bearing in mind the limitations of this cross-sectional study, these findings may contribute to a better understanding of the link between psychosocial stressors and pain sensitivity.

Cited by 8 publications

References 19 publications

<p>Age and Gender as Factors of Pressure Sensitivity of Pain-Free Persons: Are They Meaningful?</p>

<p>Age and Gender as Factors of Pressure Sensitivity of Pain-Free Persons: Are They Meaningful?</p>

<p>Rethinking the criteria for fibromyalgia in 2019: the ABC indicators</p>

War experiences and relationship problems predict pain sensitivity cross-sectionally among patients with chronic primary pain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About