Literature DB >> 10601671

Pain measurement with evoked potentials: combination of subjective ratings, randomized intensities, and long interstimulus intervals produces a P300-like confound.

D E Becker1, D W Haley, V M Ureña, C D Yingling.   

Abstract

Evoked potentials in response to painful stimuli have been studied as objective measures of pain. Bromm has advocated experimental conditions in which, (1) stimulus intensities are randomized, and (2) subjects rate each stimulus. However, a cognitive, i.e. information processing, 'late positive component' (LPC), e.g. the P300, may be elicited by these same conditions, whether or not the stimuli are painful. The LPC may overlap, and interfere with the measurement of, responses that are only seen with painful stimuli. We compared the LPC in two experimental protocols using ten subjects and electrical stimuli. In the 'Rating Protocol', shocks of different intensity levels were randomly presented and subjects rated the intensity of each stimulus. In the 'Oddball Standards Protocol', the same levels were used, but each was presented in a separate block of a single level. Stimuli were presented more rapidly and subjects had to push a button in response to occasional double shocks (oddball targets), but not to single shocks (oddball standards). The oddball targets served to direct subjects' attention to the stimuli, but only the evoked potential responses to the oddball standards were used for data analysis. To look at the difference between protocols, we computed a difference condition (Rating protocol responses minus Oddball Standards protocol responses) which we called Incremental activity. The Incremental LPC (average amplitudes from 350 to 650 ms) had a more parietal topography (amplitude at electrode Pz greater than at Cz) than the Oddball Standards LPC (Cz > Pz; protocol x electrode interaction P<0.001). This implies that the Rating Protocol LPC included P300-like activity. The parietal Incremental activity began as early as 250-350 ms after the stimulus in the responses to the most painful stimuli and therefore can confound the measurement of pain activity in the evoked potential.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10601671     DOI: 10.1016/s0304-3959(99)00182-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain        ISSN: 0304-3959            Impact factor:   6.961


  8 in total

1.  Attention to painful stimulation enhances gamma-band activity and synchronization in human sensorimotor cortex.

Authors:  Michael Hauck; Jürgen Lorenz; Andreas K Engel
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2007-08-29       Impact factor: 6.167

2.  More potential in statistical analyses of event-related potentials: a mixed regression approach.

Authors:  Helen Vossen; Gerard Van Breukelen; Hermie Hermens; Jim Van Os; Richel Lousberg
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2011-08-03       Impact factor: 4.035

3.  The genetic influence on the cortical processing of experimental pain and the moderating effect of pain status.

Authors:  Helen Vossen; Gunter Kenis; Bart Rutten; Jim van Os; Hermie Hermens; Richel Lousberg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-10-26       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Pain modulation in waking and hypnosis in women: event-related potentials and sources of cortical activity.

Authors:  Vilfredo De Pascalis; Vincenzo Varriale; Immacolata Cacace
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-01       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Influence of transient spatial attention on the P3 component and perception of painful and non-painful electric stimuli in crossed and uncrossed hands positions.

Authors:  Karolina Świder; Eligiusz Wronka; Joukje M Oosterman; Clementina M van Rijn; Marijtje L A Jongsma
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-05       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Horizontal body position reduces cortical pain-related processing: evidence from late ERPs.

Authors:  Francesca Fardo; Chiara Spironelli; Alessandro Angrilli
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-20       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Introducing the event related fixed interval area (ERFIA) multilevel technique: a method to analyze the complete epoch of event-related potentials at single trial level.

Authors:  Catherine J Vossen; Helen G M Vossen; Marco A E Marcus; Jim van Os; Richel Lousberg
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Rating the Intensity of a Laser Stimulus, but Not Attending to Changes in Its Location or Intensity Modulates the Laser-Evoked Cortical Activity.

Authors:  Diana M E Torta; Marco Ninghetto; Raffaella Ricci; Valéry Legrain
Journal:  Front Hum Neurosci       Date:  2020-03-31       Impact factor: 3.169

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.