Literature DB >> 9766832

Sex differences in response to cutaneous anesthesia: a double blind randomized study.

Michael E Robinson1, Joseph L Riley, Felicia F Brown, Henry Gremillion.   

Abstract

The existing literature on experimentally induced pain indicates that there are sex differences, with females displaying greater sensitivity. In epidemiological studies, sex differences are also noted in the prevalence of a number of pain syndromes, with females reporting more severe pain, more frequent pain, and pain of longer duration. Complicating the interpretation of pain differences between men and women in clinical samples are reports of sex differences in response to pain-reducing medications. Studies in human subjects suggest that women respond better to certain opioid analgesics than men following third molar extraction, but few studies have assessed sex effects in effectiveness of topical anesthetics. The purpose of this study was to test for sex differences in response to a topical anesthetic, Lidocaine, using double blind, placebo controlled experimental methodology, in combination with a magnitude matching psychophysical protocol using a pressure algometer. The subjects were 21 female and 23 male adult volunteers. Twenty-four subjects (12 males and 12 females) were randomly assigned to the Lidocaine condition and 20 subjects were randomly assigned to the placebo control condition (9 males and 11 females). The effect size across sex for subjects in the Lidocaine treatment condition on the response bias variable was large indicating the males rated the stimuli as less painful than the females. Sex differences were not observed for discriminability in the Lidocaine treatment condition. This study did not show sex differences in the placebo condition. These results are particularly interesting in light of previous work that has shown similar pain stimuli (pressure pain) to be the stimulation most sensitive to sex differences. Results of this study suggest that the protocol employed (pressure pain stimulus with magnitude matching task) is sensitive to both anesthetic treatment and sex differences and represents an improvement in pain assessment methodology for use in experimental studies and in the clinic.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9766832     DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3959(98)00088-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain        ISSN: 0304-3959            Impact factor:   6.961


  9 in total

1.  Is endoscopic totally extraperitoneal hernioplasty justified for the repair of groin hernia in female patients?

Authors:  H Lau; N G Patil; W K Yuen
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-10-24       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Instrumental validity and intra/inter-rater reliability of a novel low-cost digital pressure algometer.

Authors:  Daniel Jerez-Mayorga; Carolina Fernanda Dos Anjos; Maria de Cássia Macedo; Ilha Gonçalves Fernandes; Esteban Aedo-Muñoz; Leonardo Intelangelo; Alexandre Carvalho Barbosa
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2020-10-12       Impact factor: 2.984

3.  Painful and non-painful pressure sensations from human skeletal muscle.

Authors:  Thomas Graven-Nielsen; Siegfried Mense; Lars Arendt-Nielsen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2004-10-12       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 4.  Sex differences and reproductive hormone influences on human odor perception.

Authors:  Richard L Doty; E Leslie Cameron
Journal:  Physiol Behav       Date:  2009-03-09

5.  Should a mucoadhesive patch (DentiPatch) be used for gingival anesthesia in children?

Authors:  Shelly S Stecker; James Q Swift; James S Hodges; Pamela R Erickson
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2002

Review 6.  Sex, gender, and pain: a review of recent clinical and experimental findings.

Authors:  Roger B Fillingim; Christopher D King; Margarete C Ribeiro-Dasilva; Bridgett Rahim-Williams; Joseph L Riley
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 5.820

7.  Association of Gender, Painkiller Use, and Experienced Pain with Pain-Related Fear and Anxiety among University Students According to the Fear of Pain Questionnaire-9.

Authors:  Paweł Piwowarczyk; Agnieszka Kaczmarska; Paweł Kutnik; Aleksandra Hap; Joanna Chajec; Urszula Myśliwiec; Mirosław Czuczwar; Michał Borys
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-04-13       Impact factor: 3.390

8.  The minimum effective concentration (MEC90) of ropivacaine for ultrasound-guided caudal block in anorectal surgery. A dose finding study.

Authors:  Xuehan Li; Jun Li; Pei Zhang; Huifei Deng; Mingan Yang; Hongbo He; Rurong Wang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-09-17       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Fear of severe pain mediates sex differences in pain sensitivity responses to thermal stimuli.

Authors:  Maggie E Horn; Meryl J Alappattu; Charles W Gay; Mark Bishop
Journal:  Pain Res Treat       Date:  2014-01-05
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.