Literature DB >> 34253164

High concurrent validity between digital and analogue algometers to measure pressure pain thresholds in healthy participants and people with migraine: a cross-sectional study.

René F Castien1,2,3, Michel W Coppieters4,5, Tom S C Durge4, Gwendolyne G M Scholten-Peeters4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Pressure pain thresholds (PPTs) are commonly assessed to quantify mechanical sensitivity in various conditions, including migraine. Digital and analogue algometers are used, but the concurrent validity between these algometers is unknown. Therefore, we assessed the concurrent validity between a digital and analogue algometer to determine PPTs in healthy participants and people with migraine.
METHODS: Twenty-six healthy participants and twenty-nine people with migraine participated in the study. PPTs were measured interictally and bilaterally at the cephalic region (temporal muscle, C1 paraspinal muscles, and trapezius muscle) and extra-cephalic region (extensor carpi radialis muscle and tibialis anterior muscle). PPTs were first determined with a digital algometer, followed by an analogue algometer. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC3.1) and limits of agreement were calculated to quantify concurrent validity.
RESULTS: The concurrent validity between algometers in both groups was moderate to excellent (ICC3.1 ranged from 0.82 to 0.99, with 95%CI: 0.65 to 0.99). Although PPTs measured with the analogue algometer were higher at most locations in both groups (p < 0.05), the mean differences between both devices were less than 18.3 kPa. The variation in methods, such as a hand-held switch (digital algometer) versus verbal commands (analogue algometer) to indicate when the threshold was reached, may explain these differences in scores. The limits of agreement varied per location and between healthy participants and people with migraine.
CONCLUSION: The concurrent validity between the digital and analogue algometer is excellent in healthy participants and moderate in people with migraine. Both types of algometer are well-suited for research and clinical practice but are not exchangeable within a study or patient follow-up.
© 2021. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Headache; Mechanical hyperalgesia; Musculoskeletal health; Quantitative sensory testing; Rehabilitation

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34253164     DOI: 10.1186/s10194-021-01278-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Headache Pain        ISSN: 1129-2369            Impact factor:   7.277


  19 in total

1.  Does mobilization of the upper cervical spine affect pain sensitivity and autonomic nervous system function in patients with cervico-craniofacial pain?: A randomized-controlled trial.

Authors:  Roy La Touche; Alba París-Alemany; Jeffrey S Mannheimer; Santiago Angulo-Díaz-Parreño; Mark D Bishop; Antonio Lopéz-Valverde-Centeno; Harry von Piekartz; Josue Fernández-Carnero
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2013-03       Impact factor: 3.442

2.  Quantitative sensory testing in patients with migraine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hadas Nahman-Averbuch; Tom Shefi; Victor J Schneider; Dan Li; Lili Ding; Christopher D King; Robert C Coghill
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 6.961

3.  Reliability of pressure pain threshold testing in healthy pain free young adults.

Authors:  Robert Waller; Leon Straker; Peter O'Sullivan; Michele Sterling; Anne Smith
Journal:  Scand J Pain       Date:  2015-10-01

4.  Additional Effects of a Physical Therapy Protocol on Headache Frequency, Pressure Pain Threshold, and Improvement Perception in Patients With Migraine and Associated Neck Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Débora Bevilaqua-Grossi; Maria Claudia Gonçalves; Gabriela Ferreira Carvalho; Lidiane Lima Florencio; Fabíola Dach; José Geraldo Speciali; Marcelo Eduardo Bigal; Thaís Cristina Chaves
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2015-12-21       Impact factor: 3.966

5.  Which Examination Tests Detect Differences in Cervical Musculoskeletal Impairments in People With Migraine? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Tibor M Szikszay; Susann Hoenick; Karolin von Korn; Ruth Meise; Annika Schwarz; Wiebke Starke; Kerstin Luedtke
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2019-05-01

Review 6.  Studies comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for assessment of pain intensity in adults: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Marianne Jensen Hjermstad; Peter M Fayers; Dagny F Haugen; Augusto Caraceni; Geoffrey W Hanks; Jon H Loge; Robin Fainsinger; Nina Aass; Stein Kaasa
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 3.612

7.  The local and referred pain from myofascial trigger points in the temporalis muscle contributes to pain profile in chronic tension-type headache.

Authors:  César Fernández-de-Las-Peñas; Hong-You Ge; Lars Arendt-Nielsen; Maria Luz Cuadrado; Juan A Pareja
Journal:  Clin J Pain       Date:  2007 Nov-Dec       Impact factor: 3.442

Review 8.  Pain perception studies in tension-type headache.

Authors:  David Bezov; Sait Ashina; Rigmor Jensen; Lars Bendtsen
Journal:  Headache       Date:  2010-10-01       Impact factor: 5.887

9.  Validation of the Headache Impact Test (HIT-6™) across episodic and chronic migraine.

Authors:  Min Yang; Regina Rendas-Baum; Sepideh F Varon; Mark Kosinski
Journal:  Cephalalgia       Date:  2010-09-06       Impact factor: 6.292

10.  Reliability and usefulness of the pressure pain threshold measurement in patients with myofascial pain.

Authors:  Giburm Park; Chan Woo Kim; Si Bog Park; Mi Jung Kim; Seong Ho Jang
Journal:  Ann Rehabil Med       Date:  2011-06-30
View more
  1 in total

1.  Deep Cervical Muscles and Functionality in Patients with Chronic Tension-Type Headache: An Observational Study.

Authors:  Guillermo García-Pérez-de-Sevilla; Ángel Gónzalez-de-la-Flor; Daniel Martín-Vera; Diego Domínguez-Balmaseda; José Ángel Del-Blanco-Muñiz
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2022-07-10       Impact factor: 2.948

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.