Relative and absolute test-retest reliabilities of pressure pain threshold in patients with knee osteoarthritis

Abstract

Abstract Background and aims: Pressure pain threshold (PPT) and PPT maps are commonly used to quantify and visualize mechanical pain sensitivity. Although PPT’s have frequently been reported from patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA), the absolute and relative reliability of PPT assessments remain to be determined. Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the test-retest relative and absolute reliability of PPT in KOA. For that purpose, intra- and interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) as well as the standard error of measurement (SEM) and the minimal detectable change (MDC) values within eight anatomical locations covering the most painful knee of KOA patients was measured. Methods: Twenty KOA patients participated in two sessions with a period of 2 weeks±3 days apart. PPT’s were assessed over eight anatomical locations covering the knee and two remote locations over tibialis anterior and brachioradialis. The patients rated their maximum pain intensity during the past 24 h and prior to the recordings on a visual analog scale (VAS), and completed The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) and PainDetect surveys. The ICC, SEM and MDC between the sessions were assessed. The ICC for the individual variability was expressed with coefficient of variance (CV). Bland-Altman plots were used to assess potential bias in the dataset. Results: The ICC ranged from 0.85 to 0.96 for all the anatomical locations which is considered “almost perfect”. CV was lowest in session 1 and ranged from 44.2 to 57.6%. SEM for comparison ranged between 34 and 71 kPa and MDC ranged between 93 and 197 kPa with a mean PPT ranged from 273.5 to 367.7 kPa in session 1 and 268.1–331.3 kPa in session 2. The analysis of Bland-Altman plot showed no systematic bias. PPT maps showed that the patients had lower thresholds in session 2, but no significant difference was observed for the comparison between the sessions for PPT or VAS. No correlations were seen between PainDetect and PPT and PainDetect and WOMAC. Conclusions: Almost perfect relative and absolute reliabilities were found for the assessment of PPT’s for KOA patients. Implications: The present investigation implicates that PPT’s is reliable for assessing pain sensitivity and sensitization in KOA patients.