Marlene Schrimpf1, Gregor Liegl2, Markus Boeckle1, Anton Leitner1, Peter Geisler3, Christoph Pieh4. 1. Department of Psychotherapy and Biopsychosocial Health, Danube-University Krems, Dr. Karl Dorrek Straße 30, A-3500 Krems, Austria. 2. Department of Psychotherapy and Biopsychosocial Health, Danube-University Krems, Dr. Karl Dorrek Straße 30, A-3500 Krems, Austria; Medical Clinic, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117 Berlin, Germany. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Regensburg, Universitätsstraße 84, 93053 Regensburg, Germany. 4. Department of Psychotherapy and Biopsychosocial Health, Danube-University Krems, Dr. Karl Dorrek Straße 30, A-3500 Krems, Austria; Department of Psychosomatic Medicine, University Hospital Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053 Regensburg, Germany; Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Dr.-Karl-Dorrek-Straße 30, 3500 Krems, Austria. Electronic address: Christoph.pieh@donau-uni.ac.at.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is strong evidence indicating an interaction between sleep and pain. However, the size of this effect, as well as the clinical relevance, is unclear. Therefore, this meta-analysis was conducted to quantify the effect of sleep deprivation on pain perception. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using the electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane, Psyndex, Psycinfo, and Scopus. By conducting a random-effect model, the pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) of sleep deprivation on pain perception was calculated. Studies that investigated any kind of sleep deprivation in conjunction with a pain measurement were included. In cases of several pain measurements within a study, the average effect size of all measures was calculated. RESULTS: Five eligible studies (N = 190) for the between-group analysis and ten studies (N = 266) for the within-group analysis were identified. Sleep deprivation showed a medium effect in the between-group analysis (SMD = 0.62; CI95: 0.12, 1.12; z = 2.43; p = 0.015) and a large effect in the within-group analysis (SMD = 1.49; CI95: 0.82, 2.17; z = 4.35; p <0.0001). The test for heterogeneity was not significant in the between-group analysis (Q = 5.29; df = 4; p = 0.2584), but it was significant in the within-group analysis (Q = 53.49; df = 9; p <0.0001). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis confirms a medium effect (SMD = 0.62) of sleep deprivation on pain perception. As this meta-analysis is based on experimental studies in healthy subjects, the clinical relevance should be clarified.
BACKGROUND: There is strong evidence indicating an interaction between sleep and pain. However, the size of this effect, as well as the clinical relevance, is unclear. Therefore, this meta-analysis was conducted to quantify the effect of sleep deprivation on pain perception. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using the electronic databases PubMed, Cochrane, Psyndex, Psycinfo, and Scopus. By conducting a random-effect model, the pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) of sleep deprivation on pain perception was calculated. Studies that investigated any kind of sleep deprivation in conjunction with a pain measurement were included. In cases of several pain measurements within a study, the average effect size of all measures was calculated. RESULTS: Five eligible studies (N = 190) for the between-group analysis and ten studies (N = 266) for the within-group analysis were identified. Sleep deprivation showed a medium effect in the between-group analysis (SMD = 0.62; CI95: 0.12, 1.12; z = 2.43; p = 0.015) and a large effect in the within-group analysis (SMD = 1.49; CI95: 0.82, 2.17; z = 4.35; p <0.0001). The test for heterogeneity was not significant in the between-group analysis (Q = 5.29; df = 4; p = 0.2584), but it was significant in the within-group analysis (Q = 53.49; df = 9; p <0.0001). CONCLUSION: This meta-analysis confirms a medium effect (SMD = 0.62) of sleep deprivation on pain perception. As this meta-analysis is based on experimental studies in healthy subjects, the clinical relevance should be clarified.
Authors: Andrew C Heisler; Jing Song; Dorothy D Dunlop; Alyssa Wohlfahrt; Clifton O Bingham; Marcy B Bolster; Daniel J Clauw; Wendy Marder; Kristine Phillips; Tuhina Neogi; Yvonne C Lee Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2020-07-21 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Kirsten Nabe-Nielsen; Matias Brødsgaard Grynderup; Theis Lange; Johan Hviid Andersen; Jens Peter Bonde; Paul Maurice Conway; Anne Helene Garde; Annie Høgh; Linda Kaerlev; Reiner Rugulies; Åse Marie Hansen Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2016-05-02 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Dagfinn Matre; Kristian Bernhard Nilsen; Maria Katsifaraki; Siri Waage; Ståle Pallesen; Bjørn Bjorvatn Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2019-11-05 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Hsin-Yi Jean Tang; Susan M McCurry; Kenneth C Pike; Michael Von Korff; Michael V Vitiello Journal: J Psychosom Res Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Chung Jung Mun; Patrick H Finan; Michael T Smith; C Patrick Carroll; Joshua M Smyth; Sophie M Lanzkron; Jennifer A Haythornthwaite; Claudia M Campbell Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2021-06-02