Pro-nociceptive and anti-nociceptive effects of a conditioned pain modulation protocol in participants with chronic low back pain and healthy control subjects
dc.contributor.author | Rabey, M. | |
dc.contributor.author | Poon, C. | |
dc.contributor.author | Wray, J. | |
dc.contributor.author | Thamajaree, C. | |
dc.contributor.author | East, R. | |
dc.contributor.author | Slater, Helen | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-01-30T10:47:38Z | |
dc.date.available | 2017-01-30T10:47:38Z | |
dc.date.created | 2015-10-29T04:08:44Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2014 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Rabey, M. and Poon, C. and Wray, J. and Thamajaree, C. and East, R. and Slater, H. 2014. Pro-nociceptive and anti-nociceptive effects of a conditioned pain modulation protocol in participants with chronic low back pain and healthy control subjects. Manual Therapy. | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/5652 | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.math.2015.02.011 | |
dc.description.abstract |
Background: People with chronic pain may exhibit pro-nociceptive phenotypes characterised partly by reduced conditioned pain modulation (CPM). Characterising variability in CPM in people with chronic low back pain (CLBP) may inform management. Objectives: To investigate pro/anti-nociceptive effects of a CPM protocol in age/sex-matched healthy controls (HCs) and people with CLBP. Design: Case-controlled trial (64 participants/group). Method: The CPM protocol involved: test stimulus (TS) (noxious pressure applied by algometer to lumbar region); conditioning stimulus (CS) (noxious heat applied by thermode to dorsal hand). CPM recruitment was measured by the change in pain intensity (rated on a numeric rating scale (NRS)) of the TS in the presence and absence of the CS. Results: Responses to this CPM protocol were variable for both groups with measures consistent with either inhibitory or facilitatory effects. A significantly greater proportion of facilitatory responses were seen in the CLBP cohort compared to HCs (73% versus 31%). In response to the CS, participants with CLBP demonstrated a mean increase in NRS scores (mean 1.3 points; p<0.001), while HCs did not (mean-0.2 points; p=0.35) and the between-group difference in change scores was significant (mean 1.4 points; p<0.001; effect size (Hedges' g): 1.03). Conclusion: In HCs and participants with CLBP this CPM protocol elicited responses consistent with varying pro/anti-nociceptive effects. The higher proportion of participants with CLBP demonstrating a facilitatory response suggests a pro-nociceptive phenotype may characterise this cohort. | |
dc.publisher | Churchill Livingstone | |
dc.title | Pro-nociceptive and anti-nociceptive effects of a conditioned pain modulation protocol in participants with chronic low back pain and healthy control subjects | |
dc.type | Journal Article | |
dcterms.source.issn | 1356-689X | |
dcterms.source.title | Manual Therapy | |
curtin.department | School of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science | |
curtin.accessStatus | Fulltext not available |
Files in this item
Files | Size | Format | View |
---|---|---|---|
There are no files associated with this item. |