Acute experimentally-induced pain replicates the distribution but not the quality or behaviour of clinical appendicular musculoskeletal pain. A systematic review
Author:
Ford Brendon1, Halaki Mark2, Diong Joanna1, Ginn Karen A1
Affiliation:
1. Faculty of Medicine and Health , School of Medical Sciences, The University of Sydney , Sydney , NSW Australia 2. Faculty of Medicine and Health , School of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney , Sydney , NSW Australia
Abstract
Abstract
Objectives
Experimental pain is a commonly used method to draw conclusions about the motor response to clinical musculoskeletal pain. A systematic review was performed to determine if current models of acute experimental pain validly replicate the clinical experience of appendicular musculoskeletal pain with respect to the distribution and quality of pain and the pain response to provocation testing.
Methods
A structured search of Medline, Scopus and Embase databases was conducted from database inception to August 2020 using the following key terms: “experimental muscle pain” OR “experimental pain” OR “pain induced” OR “induced pain” OR “muscle hyperalgesia“ OR (“Pain model” AND “muscle”). Studies in English were included if investigators induced experimental musculoskeletal pain into a limb (including the sacroiliac joint) in humans, and if they measured and reported the distribution of pain, quality of pain or response to a provocation manoeuvre performed passively or actively. Studies were excluded if they involved prolonged or delayed experimental pain, if temporomandibular, orofacial, lumbar, thoracic or cervical spine pain were investigated, if a full text of the study was not available or if they were systematic reviews. Two investigators independently screened each title and abstract and each full text paper to determine inclusion in the review. Disagreements were resolved by consensus with a third investigator.
Results
Data from 57 experimental pain studies were included in this review. Forty-six of these studies reported pain distribution, 41 reported pain quality and six detailed the pain response to provocation testing. Hypertonic saline injection was the most common mechanism used to induce pain with 43 studies employing this method. The next most common methods were capsaicin injection (5 studies) and electrical stimulation, injection of acidic solution and ischaemia with three studies each. The distribution of experimental pain was similar to the area of pain reported in clinical appendicular musculoskeletal conditions. The quality of appendicular musculoskeletal pain was not replicated with the affective component of the McGill Pain Questionnaire consistently lower than that typically reported by musculoskeletal pain patients. The response to provocation testing was rarely investigated following experimental pain induction. Based on the limited available data, the increase in pain experienced in clinical populations during provocative maneuvers was not consistently replicated.
Conclusions
Current acute experimental pain models replicate the distribution but not the quality of chronic clinical appendicular musculoskeletal pain. Limited evidence also indicates that experimentally induced acute pain does not consistently increase with tests known to provoke pain in patients with appendicular musculoskeletal pain. The results of this review question the validity of conclusions drawn from acute experimental pain studies regarding changes in muscle behaviour in response to pain in the clinical setting.
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Subject
Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Neurology (clinical)
Reference71 articles.
1. March, L, Smith, EU, Hoy, DG, Cross, MJ, Sanchez-Riera, L, Blyth, F, et al.. Burden of disability due to musculoskeletal (MSK) disorders. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 2014;28:353–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.berh.2014.08.002. 2. Nijs, J, Daenen, L, Cras, P, Struyf, F, Roussel, N, Oostendorp, RA. Nociception affects motor output: a review on sensory-motor interaction with focus on clinical implications. Clin J Pain 2012;28:175–81. https://doi.org/10.1097/ajp.0b013e318225daf3. 3. Hodges, PW, Tucker, K. Moving differently in pain: a new theory to explain the adaptation to pain. Pain 2011;152:S90–S8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2010.10.020. 4. Bank, PJ, Peper, C, Marinus, J, Beek, PJ, Van Hilten, J. Motor consequences of experimentally induced limb pain: a systematic review. Eur J Pain 2013;17:145–57. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1532-2149.2012.00186.x. 5. Downs, SH, Black, N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998;52:377–84. https://doi.org/10.1136/jech.52.6.377.
Cited by
4 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
|
|