J Oral Facial Pain Headache. 2016;30(4):338-345. doi: 10.11607/ofph.1641.
To compare mechanical pain thresholds (MPTs) in the orofacial region assessed with two different approaches: with an electronic von Frey (EvF) device and with custom-made weighted pinprick stimulators. The test-retest reliability, variability of MPTs, and time duration of each test were also compared, as well as the ability of each test to create stimulus-response (S-R) curves.
A total of 16 healthy volunteers participated. The MPT and S-R curve measurements were done with the two different techniques at three sites: on the skin of the right cheek (face), on the buccal gingival mucosa of the right upper premolar region (gingiva), and on the tip of the tongue (tongue). The same protocol was repeated 1 to 2 weeks later to determine test-retest reliability.
The MPT measurements with the EvF device were significantly faster (74.4 ± 20.8 seconds) than those with the pinprick stimulators (196.1 ± 33.0 seconds; P < .001). The absolute MPT values obtained with the EvF device were significantly higher than the values obtained with the pinprick stimulators at all test sites (P < .001). MPTs assessed with the EvF device showed higher reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.77-0.94) than MPTs assessed with the pinprick stimulators (ICC = 0.57-0.84; P = .041). The reliability of the S-R curves was excellent for both methods with no significant differences between the methods (P = .403).
This study indicates that MPTs tested in the orofacial region with the EvF device were significantly higher than MPTs tested with the pinprick stimulators. However, the EvF device can be used with higher reliability and less time consumption for assessment of MPTs in the orofacial region than the pinprick stimulator technique, and also allows comparable construction of S-R curves.
比较两种不同方法评估口腔面部机械痛阈值(MPTs)的差异:电子 von Frey(EvF)设备和定制的加权针刺痛刺激器。还比较了 MPT 的测试-再测试可靠性、变异性和每个测试的持续时间,以及每个测试产生刺激-反应(S-R)曲线的能力。
共有 16 名健康志愿者参与。使用两种不同技术在三个部位测量 MPT 和 S-R 曲线:右侧脸颊皮肤(面部)、右上颌前磨牙区颊侧牙龈黏膜(牙龈)和舌尖(舌头)。1 到 2 周后重复相同的方案以确定测试-再测试的可靠性。
EvF 设备测量的 MPT 明显更快(74.4±20.8 秒),而针刺痛刺激器测量的 MPT 则明显较慢(196.1±33.0 秒;P<.001)。EvF 设备测量的绝对 MPT 值在所有测试部位均明显高于针刺痛刺激器测量的 MPT 值(P<.001)。EvF 设备评估的 MPT 具有更高的可靠性(组内相关系数[ICC] = 0.77-0.94),而针刺痛刺激器评估的 MPT 可靠性则较低(ICC = 0.57-0.84;P=0.041)。两种方法的 S-R 曲线的可靠性均为优秀,两种方法之间无显著差异(P=0.403)。
本研究表明,EvF 设备评估口腔面部 MPT 明显高于针刺痛刺激器评估的 MPT。然而,EvF 设备在评估口腔面部 MPT 方面的可靠性更高,所需时间更短,而针刺痛刺激器技术则相反,并且也可以进行可比的 S-R 曲线构建。