Suppr超能文献

种族和民族之间实验性疼痛敏感性的差异:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Racial and ethnic differences in experimental pain sensitivity: systematic review and meta-analysis.

机构信息

Department of Pain and Translational Symptom Science, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD.

Department of Neural and Pain Sciences, University of Maryland, Baltimore, MD.

出版信息

Pain. 2017 Feb;158(2):194-211. doi: 10.1097/j.pain.0000000000000731.

Abstract

Our objective was to describe the racial and ethnic differences in experimental pain sensitivity. Four databases (PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and PsycINFO) were searched for studies examining racial/ethnic differences in experimental pain sensitivity. Thermal-heat, cold-pressor, pressure, ischemic, mechanical cutaneous, electrical, and chemical experimental pain modalities were assessed. Risk of bias was assessed using the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality guideline. Meta-analysis was used to calculate standardized mean differences (SMDs) by pain sensitivity measures. Studies comparing African Americans (AAs) and non-Hispanic whites (NHWs) were included for meta-analyses because of high heterogeneity in other racial/ethnic group comparisons. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed by subgroup analyses by sex, sample size, sample characteristics, and pain modalities. A total of 41 studies met the review criteria. Overall, AAs, Asians, and Hispanics had higher pain sensitivity compared with NHWs, particularly lower pain tolerance, higher pain ratings, and greater temporal summation of pain. Meta-analyses revealed that AAs had lower pain tolerance (SMD: -0.90, 95% confidence intervals [CIs]: -1.10 to -0.70) and higher pain ratings (SMD: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.30-0.69) but no significant differences in pain threshold (SMD: -0.06, 95% CI: -0.23 to 0.10) compared with NHWs. Estimates did not vary by pain modalities, nor by other demographic factors; however, SMDs were significantly different based on the sample size. Racial/ethnic differences in experimental pain sensitivity were more pronounced with suprathreshold than with threshold stimuli, which is important in clinical pain treatment. Additional studies examining mechanisms to explain such differences in pain tolerance and pain ratings are needed.

摘要

我们的目标是描述实验性疼痛敏感性的种族和民族差异。检索了四个数据库(PubMed、EMBASE、Cochrane 中央对照试验注册中心和 PsycINFO),以研究实验性疼痛敏感性的种族/民族差异。评估了热-热、冷压、压力、缺血、机械性皮肤、电和化学实验性疼痛模式。使用医疗保健研究与质量局指南评估偏倚风险。使用标准化均数差(SMD)评估疼痛敏感性测量的荟萃分析。由于其他种族/民族群体比较存在高度异质性,因此仅将比较非裔美国人(AA)和非西班牙裔白人(NHW)的研究纳入荟萃分析。通过亚组分析评估统计学异质性,包括性别、样本量、样本特征和疼痛模式。共有 41 项研究符合审查标准。总体而言,AA、亚洲人和西班牙裔的疼痛敏感性高于 NHW,尤其是疼痛耐受力较低、疼痛评分较高和疼痛时间总和较大。荟萃分析显示,AA 的疼痛耐受力较低(SMD:-0.90,95%置信区间 [CI]:-1.10 至-0.70)和疼痛评分较高(SMD:0.50,95% CI:0.30-0.69),但疼痛阈值无显著差异(SMD:-0.06,95% CI:-0.23 至 0.10)与 NHW 相比。估计值不因疼痛模式而异,也不因其他人口统计学因素而异;然而,基于样本量,SMD 存在显著差异。实验性疼痛敏感性的种族/民族差异在阈上刺激下比在阈下刺激下更为明显,这在临床疼痛治疗中很重要。需要进一步研究以探讨解释疼痛耐受力和疼痛评分差异的机制。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验