Literature DB >> 30391525

Was That Painful or Nonpainful? The Sensation and Pain Rating Scale Performs Well in the Experimental Context.

Victoria J Madden1, Peter R Kamerman2, Valeria Bellan3, Mark J Catley3, Leslie N Russek4, Danny Camfferman3, G Lorimer Moseley3.   

Abstract

In experiments on pain, participants are frequently exposed to nonpainful and painful stimuli; however, the conventional pain-rating scales lack a nonpainful range and a clear point of transition from nonpainful to painful events. The Sensation and Pain Rating Scale (SPARS) assesses the full stimulus intensity range, extending from no sensation (rating: -50) to worst pain imaginable (rating: +50), and it explicitly identifies pain threshold (rating: 0). Here, we tested the SPARS in 2 experiments by using laser heat stimuli to establish its stimulus-response characteristics (Experiment 1, N = 19, 13 stimulus intensities applied 26 times each across a 1-4 J range), and compared it to 0 to 100 scales that assess nonpainful (0: no sensation, 100: pain) and painful (0: no pain, 100: worst pain imaginable) events (Experiment 2, N = 7, 9 stimulus intensities applied 36 times each across a 1.5-4.5 J range). Despite high inter- and intraindividual variations, we found a reasonably consistent curvilinear stimulus-response relationship (the curve flattens around pain threshold), with stable response characteristics across the range of the scale. The SPARS ratings transformed to a 0 to 100 range tended to be lower than the 0 to 100 pain rating scale in the noxious stimulus intensity range and greater than the 0 to 100 nonpainful sensation scale in the non-noxious stimulus range, likely reflecting differences in scale dimensionality. The SPARS overcomes limitations in scale range inherent to conventional pain rating scales. As such, it is well suited to experimental studies that must quantify a wider range of perceptual intensity or distinguish between painful and nonpainful events. PERSPECTIVE: This article presents the stimulus-response characteristics of a new scale designed to allow participants to rate a range of nonpainful and painful stimuli. The scale could be useful for research that involves exposing participants to a range of stimulation intensities or requires a clear distinction between nonpainful and painful events.
Copyright © 2018 the American Pain Society. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Self-report; healthy volunteers; multilevel analysis; pain assessment; pain threshold

Year:  2018        PMID: 30391525     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2018.10.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pain        ISSN: 1526-5900            Impact factor:   5.820


  3 in total

1.  The influence of a manipulation of threat on experimentally-induced secondary hyperalgesia.

Authors:  Gillian J Bedwell; Caron Louw; Romy Parker; Emanuel van den Broeke; Johan W Vlaeyen; G Lorimer Moseley; Victoria J Madden
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2022-06-20       Impact factor: 3.061

2.  Modulating pain thresholds through classical conditioning.

Authors:  Juliane Traxler; Victoria J Madden; G Lorimer Moseley; Johan W S Vlaeyen
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2019-03-08       Impact factor: 2.984

3.  Immediate comfort perception of 3D-printed foot orthoses in individuals with unilateral heel pain.

Authors:  Malia Ho; Julie Nguyen; Kerwin Talbot; Luke Heales; Crystal Kean; Pui W Kong; Robert Stanton
Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 1.672

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.