Literature DB >> 12088694

Cortical potentials related to assessment of pain intensity with visual analogue scale (VAS).

Masutaro Kanda1, Masao Matsuhashi, Nobukatsu Sawamoto, Tatsuhide Oga, Tatsuya Mima, Takashi Nagamine, Hiroshi Shibasaki.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To elucidate brain mechanisms underlying the psychophysical processes to measure pain intensity, pain-related somatosensory evoked potentials (pain SEPs) following painful CO(2) laser stimulation were studied while employing a task to measure intensity of pain on a visual analogue scale (VAS).
METHODS: In 12 healthy subjects, 3 kinds of CO(2) laser stimuli, different in intensity as determined by irradiation duration of 40, 60 and 80ms, were randomly delivered to the left hand dorsum at an irregular interval of 4-6s. The subject was requested to assess the intensity of each pain stimulus and point to the VAS scale by moving a pointer held with the right hand according to the subjective feeling of pain sensation (pain intensity assessment (PIA) condition). For the control condition, the subject moved the pointer to the midpoint of the VAS line irrespective of the pain intensity (control motor task condition). Electroencephalograms were recorded from 21 scalp electrodes, referenced to the linked earlobes, and were averaged time-locked to the stimulus onset for each stimulus duration as well as for each task condition.
RESULTS: The VAS scores were 2.8+/-0.5/10 for the stimulus of 40ms duration, 4.8+/-0.8/10 for 60ms and 6.1+/-0.9/10 for 80ms, and showed a highly significant positive correlation with the stimulus duration. Following the early components of pain SEPs which were affected by stimulus duration but not modulated by task conditions, a surface-positive peak at latency of 612-642ms was identified exclusively under the PIA condition regardless of the stimulus intensity and was called 'intensity assessment-related potential (IAP)'. The IAP was maximal at the midline parietal area and symmetrically distributed over the scalp. Neither latency nor amplitude of the IAP was significantly different among the 3 different stimulus intensities.
CONCLUSIONS: IAP is an event-related potential (ERP) associated with assessment of pain intensity but not influenced by pain intensity itself. From its scalp distribution, it can be assumed that the assessment of pain intensity involves multiple areas in both hemispheres.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12088694     DOI: 10.1016/s1388-2457(02)00125-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol        ISSN: 1388-2457            Impact factor:   3.708


  7 in total

1.  Neural correlates of heat-evoked pain memory in humans.

Authors:  Liping Wang; Peng Gui; Lei Li; Yixuan Ku; Mark Bodner; Gaojie Fan; Yong-Di Zhou; Xiao-Wei Dong
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 2.714

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 effect of platelet rich plasma combined with celecoxib on knee function and pain in patients with knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Mingjun Nie; Jianzhong Zhao; Guangcheng Zhang; Jiazhu Tang; Wei Zhu; Qing Zhang
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2022 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.340

4.  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

5.  Pain-related evoked potential in healthy adults.

Authors:  Kyung Joon Oh; Sung Hoon Kim; Young-Hee Lee; Jong Heon Kim; Hong Sun Jung; Tae Jun Park; Jin Park; Jong Mock Shinn
Journal:  Ann Rehabil Med       Date:  2015-02-28

6.  Altered regional homogeneity in experimentally induced low back pain: a resting-state fMRI study.

Authors:  Shan-shan Zhang; Wen Wu; Zi-ping Liu; Guo-zhi Huang; Shi-gui Guo; Jian-ming Yang
Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 4.262

7.  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

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.