Hastie Barbara A, Riley Joseph L, Robinson Michael E, Glover Toni, Campbell Claudia M, Staud Roland, Fillingim Roger B
University of Florida College of Dentistry, Division of Public Health Services and Research, 1600 SW Archer Road, HSC D8-37, P.O. Box 100404, 32610-0404 Gainesville, FL, USA Malcom Randall VA Medical Center, Gainesville, FL, USA Department of Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Pain. 2005 Aug;116(3):227-237. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2005.04.016.
Identifying individual differences in pain is an important topic; however, little is known regarding patterns of responses across various experimental pain modalities. This study evaluated subgroups emerging from multiple experimental pain measures. One hundred and eighty-eight individuals (59.0% female) completed several psychological instruments and underwent ischemic, pressure, and thermal pain assessments. Thirteen separate pain measures were obtained by using three experimental pain modalities with several parameters tested within each modality. The pain ratings and scores were submitted to factor analysis that identified four pain factors from which Pain Sensitivity Index (PSI) scores were computed: heat pain (HP), pressure pain (PP), ischemic pain (IP), and temporal summation of heat pain (TS). Cluster analyses of PSI scores revealed four distinct clusters. The first cluster demonstrated high overall pain sensitivity, the second cluster revealed high TS, the third cluster showed particular insensitivity to IP and low sensitivity across pain modalities except PP, and the fourth cluster demonstrated low sensitivity to PP. Significant correlations were found between psychological measures and Index scores and those differed by sex. Cluster membership was associated with demographic variables of ethnicity and sex as well as specific psychosocial variables, although cluster differences were only partially explained by such factors. These analyses revealed that groups respond differently across varied pain stimuli, and this was not related solely to demographic or psychosocial factors. These findings highlight the need for future investigation to identify patterns of responses across different pain modalities in order to more accurately characterize individual differences in responses to experimental pain.
识别个体在疼痛方面的差异是一个重要的课题;然而,对于各种实验性疼痛模式下的反应模式却知之甚少。本研究评估了从多种实验性疼痛测量中得出的亚组。188名个体(59.0%为女性)完成了多项心理测试工具,并接受了缺血性、压力性和热性疼痛评估。通过使用三种实验性疼痛模式,并在每种模式下测试多个参数,获得了13项独立疼痛测量结果。将疼痛评分和分数进行因子分析,确定了四个疼痛因子,并据此计算出疼痛敏感性指数(PSI)分数:热痛(HP)、压力痛(PP)、缺血性疼痛(IP)和热痛时间总和(TS)。对PSI分数进行聚类分析,发现了四个不同的聚类。第一类表现出总体疼痛敏感性高,第二类显示出高TS,第三类对IP特别不敏感,除PP外对其他疼痛模式的敏感性较低,第四类对PP敏感性较低。心理测量与指数分数之间存在显著相关性,且这些相关性因性别而异。聚类成员与种族和性别的人口统计学变量以及特定的心理社会变量相关,尽管聚类差异仅部分由这些因素解释。这些分析表明,不同组在不同疼痛刺激下的反应不同,且这不仅仅与人口统计学或心理社会因素有关。这些发现凸显了未来进行研究以确定不同疼痛模式下反应模式的必要性,以便更准确地描述个体对实验性疼痛反应的差异。