Miriam O Ezenwa1,2, Robert E Molokie2,3, Zaijie Jim Wang2,4, Yingwei Yao1,5, Marie L Suarez1, Cherese Pullum1, Judith M Schlaeger1, Roger B Fillingim6, Diana J Wilkie1,2,5. 1. University of Illinois at Chicago, College of Nursing Department of Biobehavioral Health Science, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. 2. University of Illinois at Chicago, Comprehensive Sickle Cell Center, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. 3. College of Medicine, College of Pharmacy, Jesse Brown VA Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. 4. Department of Biopharmaceutical Sciences and Cancer Center, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. 5. University of Illinois at Chicago, Center of Excellence for End-of-Life Transition Research, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. 6. College of Dentistry, Pain Research and Intervention Center of Excellence, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, U.S.A.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Pain is the hallmark symptom of sickle cell disease (SCD), yet the types of pain that these patients experience, and the underlying mechanisms, have not been well characterized. The study purpose was to determine the safety and utility of a mechanical and thermal quantitative sensory testing (QST) protocol and the feasibility of utilizing neuropathic pain questionnaires among adults with SCD. METHODS: A convenience sample (N = 25, 18 women, mean age 38.5 ± 12.5 [20-58 years]) completed self-report pain and quality-of-life tools. Subjects also underwent testing with the TSA-II NeuroSensory Analyzer and calibrated von Frey microfilaments. RESULTS: We found that the QST protocol was safe and did not stimulate a SCD pain crisis. There was evidence of central sensitization (n = 15), peripheral sensitization (n = 1), a mix of central and peripheral sensitization (n = 8), or no sensitization (n = 1). The neuropathic pain self-report tools were feasible with evidence of construct validity; 40% of the subjects reported S-LANSS scores that were indicative of neuropathic pain and had evidence of central, peripheral or mixed sensitization. DISCUSSION: The QST protocol can be safely conducted in adults with SCD and provides evidence of central or peripheral sensitization, which is consistent with a neuropathic component to SCD pain. These findings are novel, warrant a larger confirmatory study, and indicate the need for normative QST data from African American adults and older adults.
OBJECTIVES:Pain is the hallmark symptom of sickle cell disease (SCD), yet the types of pain that these patients experience, and the underlying mechanisms, have not been well characterized. The study purpose was to determine the safety and utility of a mechanical and thermal quantitative sensory testing (QST) protocol and the feasibility of utilizing neuropathic pain questionnaires among adults with SCD. METHODS: A convenience sample (N = 25, 18 women, mean age 38.5 ± 12.5 [20-58 years]) completed self-report pain and quality-of-life tools. Subjects also underwent testing with the TSA-II NeuroSensory Analyzer and calibrated von Frey microfilaments. RESULTS: We found that the QST protocol was safe and did not stimulate a SCD pain crisis. There was evidence of central sensitization (n = 15), peripheral sensitization (n = 1), a mix of central and peripheral sensitization (n = 8), or no sensitization (n = 1). The neuropathic pain self-report tools were feasible with evidence of construct validity; 40% of the subjects reported S-LANSS scores that were indicative of neuropathic pain and had evidence of central, peripheral or mixed sensitization. DISCUSSION: The QST protocol can be safely conducted in adults with SCD and provides evidence of central or peripheral sensitization, which is consistent with a neuropathic component to SCD pain. These findings are novel, warrant a larger confirmatory study, and indicate the need for normative QST data from African American adults and older adults.
Authors: Diana J Wilkie; M Kay M Judge; Donna L Berry; Jean Dell; Shiping Zong; Rudy Gilespie Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Hsiu-Ying Huang; Diana J Wilkie; Shi-Ping Sam Zong; Donna Berry; Daniela Hairabedian; M Kay Judge; Stuart Farber; Charles Chabal Journal: Comput Inform Nurs Date: 2003 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 1.985
Authors: Brenda W Dyal; Miriam O Ezenwa; Saunjoo L Yoon; Roger B Fillingim; Yingwei Yao; Judith M Schlaeger; Marie L Suarez; Zaijie J Wang; Robert E Molokie; Diana J Wilkie Journal: Pain Pract Date: 2019-10-18 Impact factor: 3.183
Authors: Robert E Molokie; Chariz Montminy; Corissa Dionisio; Muhammad Ahmen Farooqui; Michel Gowhari; Yingwei Yao; Marie L Suarez; Miriam O Ezenwa; Judith M Schlaeger; Zaijie J Wang; Diana J Wilkie Journal: Am J Emerg Med Date: 2017-07-13 Impact factor: 2.469
Authors: Deepika S Darbari; Johnson P Hampson; Eric Ichesco; Nadja Kadom; Gilbert Vezina; Iordanis Evangelou; Daniel J Clauw; James G Taylor Vi; Richard E Harris Journal: J Pain Date: 2015-08-18 Impact factor: 5.820
Authors: C Patrick Carroll; Sophie Lanzkron; Carlton Haywood; Kasey Kiley; Megan Pejsa; Gyasi Moscou-Jackson; Jennifer A Haythornthwaite; Claudia M Campbell Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Brenda W Dyal; Miriam O Ezenwa; Saunjoo L Yoon; Roger B Fillingim; Yingwei Yao; Judith M Schlaeger; Marie L Suarez; Zaijie J Wang; Robert E Molokie; Diana J Wilkie Journal: Nurs Res Date: 2019 Sep/Oct Impact factor: 2.381