...
首页> 外文期刊>Somatosensory & motor research >Comparing test-retest reliability and magnitude of conditioned pain modulation using different combinations of test and conditioning stimuli
【24h】

Comparing test-retest reliability and magnitude of conditioned pain modulation using different combinations of test and conditioning stimuli

机译:使用测试和条件刺激的不同组合比较测试-再测试的可靠性和条件性疼痛调节的幅度

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

This study aimed to compare the reliability and magnitude of conditioned pain modulation (CPM) by applying different test stimuli (TS) and conditioning stimuli (CS). Twenty-six healthy male participants were recruited in the study of two identical sessions. In each session, four TS (electrical, heat, handheld, and cuff pressure algometry) were applied before and during CS (cold pressor test (CPT) or cuff algometry). The same procedure was repeated with 45-min intervals, but with the other CS. Five thresholds were measured including four pain detection thresholds from four TS and pain tolerance threshold from cuff TS (cuff PTT). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC (3,1)) and coefficient of variation (CV) were calculated as measures of reliability. The reliability of TS before and during CS was good for all combinations (ICC: 0.60-0.96, CV: 2.2-22.9%), but the reliability of the CPM effect varied (ICC: 0.04-0.53, CV: 63.6-503.9%). The most reliable combinations were considered to be the handheld pressure pain threshold with CPT (ICC: 0.49, CV: 63.6%) and the cuff pressure pain threshold with CPT (ICC: 0.44, CV: 107.6%). Significant CPM effects were found for all combinations, except the combinations of electrical and heat pain thresholds with cuff CS, which indicates the novel classification of the CPM mechanism. The combinations of handheld pressure and heat pain threshold with CPT would provide the minimum sample size to detect the significant CPM changes in further studies. It is beneficial to provide and compare both ICC and CV to design further clinical trials.
机译:本研究旨在通过应用不同的测试刺激(TS)和条件刺激(CS)比较条件性疼痛调节(CPM)的可靠性和幅度。在两个相同的阶段的研究中招募了26位健康的男性参与者。在每个疗程中,在CS(冷压试验(CPT)或袖带法)之前和期间应用四个TS(电,热,手持和袖带法)。每隔45分钟重复一次相同的步骤,但使用另一个CS。测量了五个阈值,包括来自四个TS的四个疼痛检测阈值和来自袖带TS(袖带PTT)的疼痛耐受性阈值。计算类内相关系数(ICC(3,1))和变异系数(CV)作为可靠性的度量。在所有组合中CS之前和期间TS的可靠性都很好(ICC:0.60-0.96,CV:2.2-22.9%),但是CPM效应的可靠性有所不同(ICC:0.04-0.53,CV:63.6-503.9%) 。最可靠的组合被认为是CPT的手持压力疼痛阈值(ICC:0.49,CV:63.6%)和CPT的袖带压力疼痛阈值(ICC:0.44,CV:107.6%)。除电和热痛阈值与袖带CS的组合外,所有组合均发现了显着的CPM效果,这表明了CPM机制的新颖分类。手持压力和热痛阈值与CPT的组合将提供最小的样本量,以检测进一步研究中CPM的显着变化。提供并比较ICC和CV以设计进一步的临床试验是有益的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号