Peak alpha frequency differs between chronic back pain and chronic widespread pain.

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Natalie McLain, Rocco Cavaleri, Jason Kutch
{"title":"Peak alpha frequency differs between chronic back pain and chronic widespread pain.","authors":"Natalie McLain, Rocco Cavaleri, Jason Kutch","doi":"10.1002/ejp.4737","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low peak alpha frequency (PAF) is an electroencephalography (EEG) outcome associated reliably with high acute pain sensitivity. However, existing research suggests that the relationship between PAF and chronic pain is more variable. This variability could be attributable to chronic pain groups typically being examined as homogenous populations, without consideration being given to potential diagnosis-specific differences. Indeed, while emerging work has compared individuals with chronic pain to healthy controls, no previous studies have examined differences in PAF between diagnoses or across chronic pain subtypes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>To address this gap, we reanalysed a dataset of resting state EEG previously used to demonstrate a lack of difference in PAF between individuals with chronic pain and healthy controls. In this new analysis, we separated patients by diagnosis before comparing PAF across three subgroups: chronic widespread pain (n = 30), chronic back pain (n = 38), and healthy controls (n = 87).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We replicate the original finding of no significant difference between chronic pain groups and controls, but also find that individuals with widespread pain had significantly higher global average PAF values than those of people with chronic back pain [p = 0.028, β = 0.25 Hz] after controlling for age, sex, and depression.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These novel findings reveal PAF values in individuals with chronic pain may be diagnosis-specific and not uniformly shifted from the values of healthy controls. Future studies should account for diagnosis and be cautious with exploring homogenous 'chronic pain' classifications during investigations of PAF.</p><p><strong>Significance: </strong>Our work suggests that, contrary to previous hypotheses, inter-individual differences in PAF reflect diagnosis-specific mechanisms rather than the general presence of chronic pain, and therefore may have important implications for future work regarding individually-tailored pain management strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":12021,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Pain","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ejp.4737","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Low peak alpha frequency (PAF) is an electroencephalography (EEG) outcome associated reliably with high acute pain sensitivity. However, existing research suggests that the relationship between PAF and chronic pain is more variable. This variability could be attributable to chronic pain groups typically being examined as homogenous populations, without consideration being given to potential diagnosis-specific differences. Indeed, while emerging work has compared individuals with chronic pain to healthy controls, no previous studies have examined differences in PAF between diagnoses or across chronic pain subtypes.

Methods: To address this gap, we reanalysed a dataset of resting state EEG previously used to demonstrate a lack of difference in PAF between individuals with chronic pain and healthy controls. In this new analysis, we separated patients by diagnosis before comparing PAF across three subgroups: chronic widespread pain (n = 30), chronic back pain (n = 38), and healthy controls (n = 87).

Results: We replicate the original finding of no significant difference between chronic pain groups and controls, but also find that individuals with widespread pain had significantly higher global average PAF values than those of people with chronic back pain [p = 0.028, β = 0.25 Hz] after controlling for age, sex, and depression.

Conclusions: These novel findings reveal PAF values in individuals with chronic pain may be diagnosis-specific and not uniformly shifted from the values of healthy controls. Future studies should account for diagnosis and be cautious with exploring homogenous 'chronic pain' classifications during investigations of PAF.

Significance: Our work suggests that, contrary to previous hypotheses, inter-individual differences in PAF reflect diagnosis-specific mechanisms rather than the general presence of chronic pain, and therefore may have important implications for future work regarding individually-tailored pain management strategies.

慢性背痛和慢性广泛性疼痛的阿尔法峰值频率不同。
背景:低峰值α频率(PAF)是一种脑电图(EEG)结果,与急性疼痛敏感性高有可靠的联系。然而,现有研究表明,PAF 与慢性疼痛之间的关系变化较大。造成这种差异的原因可能是慢性疼痛群体通常被作为同质人群进行研究,而没有考虑潜在的特定诊断差异。事实上,虽然新近的研究将慢性疼痛患者与健康对照组进行了比较,但之前的研究并未对不同诊断或不同慢性疼痛亚型的 PAF 差异进行研究:为了填补这一空白,我们重新分析了静息状态脑电图数据集,该数据集曾用于证明慢性疼痛患者与健康对照组之间的 PAF 没有差异。在这项新的分析中,我们按照诊断将患者分开,然后比较三个亚组的 PAF:慢性广泛性疼痛(30 人)、慢性背痛(38 人)和健康对照组(87 人):结果:我们重复了原来的发现,即慢性疼痛组与对照组之间无显著差异,但同时发现,在控制年龄、性别和抑郁后,广泛性疼痛患者的全球平均 PAF 值明显高于慢性背痛患者[p = 0.028,β = 0.25 Hz]:这些新发现揭示了慢性疼痛患者的 PAF 值可能具有诊断特异性,而且与健康对照组的 PAF 值偏移不一致。未来的研究应考虑诊断因素,并在调查 PAF 时谨慎探索同质化的 "慢性疼痛 "分类:我们的研究结果表明,与之前的假设相反,PAF 的个体间差异反映的是诊断特异性机制,而不是慢性疼痛的普遍存在。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
European Journal of Pain
European Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
5.60%
发文量
163
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: European Journal of Pain (EJP) publishes clinical and basic science research papers relevant to all aspects of pain and its management, including specialties such as anaesthesia, dentistry, neurology and neurosurgery, orthopaedics, palliative care, pharmacology, physiology, psychiatry, psychology and rehabilitation; socio-economic aspects of pain are also covered. Regular sections in the journal are as follows: • Editorials and Commentaries • Position Papers and Guidelines • Reviews • Original Articles • Letters • Bookshelf The journal particularly welcomes clinical trials, which are published on an occasional basis. Research articles are published under the following subject headings: • Neurobiology • Neurology • Experimental Pharmacology • Clinical Pharmacology • Psychology • Behavioural Therapy • Epidemiology • Cancer Pain • Acute Pain • Clinical Trials.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信