Search

Background: Controversy exists with the presence of alterations in descending pain inhibition mechanisms in patients with non‐specific neck pain (NSNP). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the status of conditioned pain modulation CPM, remote pressure pain thresholds (PPT), and psychological factors in a specific subgroup of patients with NSNP such as young adult students. In addition, possible associations between CPM, psychological factors, and pain characteristics were analyzed. Methods: Thirty students with recurrent or chronic NSNP and 30 pain‐free students were included in this cross‐sectional study. The following measures were assessed: CPM, remote PPT, psychological factors (depression, anxiety, pain catastrophizing, and kinesiophobia), pain characteristics (duration, intensity, severity of chronic pain, interference with daily life), and central sensitization inventory (CSI). Results: No significant differences were found in the efficacy of CPM between students with chronic or recurrent NSNP and pain‐free students (β coefficient = −0.67; 95% CI = −1.54, 0.20). However, students with pain showed a significantly higher remote PPT (mean difference = −1.94; 95% CI = −2.71, −1.18). and a greater presence of anxious (mean difference = 6; 95% CI = 2, 9) and depressive symptoms (mean difference = 8.57; 95% CI = 3.97, 13.16). In addition, significant moderate or strong correlations were found between CPM and pain intensity (partial r = 0.41), pain catastrophizing and mean pain intensity (r = 0.37), grade (r = 0.50), and interference of pain (r = 0.57), kinesiophobia and disability (r = 0.38), and depression and CSI (r = 0.39). Conclusions: Young adult students with chronic or recurrent NSNP present remote hyperalgesia and symptoms of depression and anxiety but not dysfunctional CPM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chronic pain conditions are complex multifactorial disorders with physical, psychological, and environmental factors contributing to their onset and persistence. Among these conditions, the role of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and the impact of a specific therapeutic education (TE) on pain management have emerged as important areas of research. Objective: This study aims to investigate the effects of a specific type of therapeutic education on pain levels and BDNF concentrations. Methods: In this single-blind, randomized clinical trial, patients will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: one will receive exercise with TE and the other without TE. Assessments will be made at baseline, mid-treatment, post-intervention, and at one and eight months. Outcomes: This study will shed light on the effectiveness of a therapeutic education (TE) program in pain management. Additionally, it will provide information on its effects on BDNF levels, a biomarker of brain plasticity, as well as on various psychosocial variables that can influence pain experience. Conclusion: By comprehensively addressing the need to quantify brain changes more precisely in individuals with chronic pain during interventions like TE and recognizing the importance of establishing a more structured and comprehensive protocol, this study lays a solid and replicable foundation for future evidence-based treatment developments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractPurposeMethodsResultsConclusions\nImplications for rehabilitationTo translate and cross-culturally adapt the King’s Parkinson’s Disease Pain Scale (KPPS) into Spanish.The English KPPS was forward translated into Spanish, back translated, and revised by the original developers. Cross-cultural adaptation of relevant target groups was conducted following COSMIN standards. Cognitive pretesting in Spanish people with Parkinson’s Disease (PD) and pain was performed via three semi-structured focus group meetings. Changes were implemented based on qualitative and quantitative analyses. A Delphi study (two rounds) of individual assessments by Spanish experts was conducted. Changes were implemented based on the Content Validity Index (CVI) at item and scale levels (I-CVI/S-CVI).Five Spanish professionals performed the initial translation. Thirty-eight inter-translation inconsistencies were identified, and consensus was reached for a unified version. After back translation and confirmation with scale developers, the pre-final Spanish KPPS was obtained. Cognitive pretesting in 30 people with PD-related pain identified 5 items where terminology changes were made to assure comprehensibility. The Delphi study in 14 Spanish experts underlined the necessity to further modify two items. After the second round, all experts agreed on the modifications and I-CVI and S-CVI were satisfactory.The KPPS was successfully translated and cross-culturally adapted into Spanish.The King’s Parkinson’s Disease Pain Scale (KPPS) was translated into Spanish by 5 independent experts.Cross-cultural validity was assessed by Spanish Parkinson’s Disease (PD) patients and neurology experts.The Spanish KPPS adaptation was relevant, understandable, and comprehensive.Rehabilitation professionals will have access to the Spanish KPPS version for assessing PD-related pain in Spanish speaking patients.The King’s Parkinson’s Disease Pain Scale (KPPS) was translated into Spanish by 5 independent experts.Cross-cultural validity was assessed by Spanish Parkinson’s Disease (PD) patients and neurology experts.The Spanish KPPS adaptation was relevant, understandable, and comprehensive.Rehabilitation professionals will have access to the Spanish KPPS version for assessing PD-related pain in Spanish speaking patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] • First trial using tDCS for Parkinsońs disease-related pain has been performed. • tDCS alleviates perceived pain and increases descending inhibitory systems in Parkinsońs disease patients. • Conditioned Pain Modulation could mediate pain relief in Parkinsońs disease. To evaluate the effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) on Parkinson's disease (PD)-related pain. This triple-blind randomized controlled trial included twenty-two patients (age range 38–85, 10 male) with PD-related pain. Eleven subjects received ten sessions of 20 minutes tDCS over the primary motor cortex contralateral to pain at 2 mA intensity. Eleven subjects received sham stimulation. Outcome measures included changes in the Kinǵs Parkinsońs Pain Scale (KPPS), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), widespread mechanical hyperalgesia (WMH), temporal summation of pain (TS), and conditioned pain modulation (CPM). Significant differences were found in KPPS between groups favoring the active-tDCS group compared to the sham-tDCS group at 15-days follow-up (p = 0.014) but not at 2 days post-intervention (p = 0.059). The active-group showed significant improvements over the sham-group after 15 days (p = 0.017). Significant changes were found in CPM between groups in favor of active-tDCS group at 2 days post-intervention (p = 0.002) and at 15 days (p = 0.017). No meaningful differences were observed in BPI or TS. tDCS of the primary motor cortex alleviates perceived PD-related pain, reduces pain sensitization, and enhances descending pain inhibition. This is the first study to test and demonstrate the use of tDCS for improving PD-related pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study is to determine the effect that different tDCS protocols have on pain processing in healthy people, assessed using quantitative sensory tests (QST) and evoked pain intensity. Methods: We systematically searched in EMBASE, CINAHL, PubMed, PEDro, PsycInfo, and Web of Science. Articles on tDCS on a healthy population and regarding QST, such as pressure pain thresholds (PPT), heat pain thresholds (HPT), cold pain threshold (CPT), or evoked pain intensity were selected. Quality was analyzed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and PEDro scale. Results: Twenty-six RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis and sixteen in the meta-analysis. There were no significant differences in PPTs between tDCS and sham, but differences were observed when applying tDCS over S1 in PPTs compared to sham. Significant differences in CPTs were observed between tDCS and sham over DLPFC and differences in pain intensity were observed between tDCS and sham over M1. Non-significant effects were found for the effects of tDCS on HPTs. Conclusion: tDCS anodic over S1 stimulation increases PPTs, while a-tDCS over DLPFC affects CPTs. The HPTs with tDCS are worse. Finally, M1 a-tDCS seems to reduce evoked pain intensity in healthy subjects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]