↓ Skip to main content

Evoked potentials after painful cutaneous electrical stimulation depict pain relief during a conditioned pain modulation

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neurology, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
75 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evoked potentials after painful cutaneous electrical stimulation depict pain relief during a conditioned pain modulation
Published in
BMC Neurology, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12883-017-0946-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Oliver Höffken, Özüm S. Özgül, Elena K. Enax-Krumova, Martin Tegenthoff, Christoph Maier

Abstract

Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) evaluates the pain modulating effect of a noxious conditioning stimulus (CS) on another noxious test stimulus (TS), mostly based solely on subjective pain ratings. We used painful cutaneous electrical stimulation (PCES) to induce TS in a novel CPM-model. Additionally, to evaluate a more objective parameter, we recorded the corresponding changes of cortical evoked potentials (PCES-EP). We examined the CPM-effect in 17 healthy subjects in a randomized controlled cross-over design during immersion of the non-dominant hand into 10 °C or 24 °C cold water (CS). Using three custom-built concentric surface electrodes, electrical stimuli were applied on the dominant hand, inducing pain of 40-60 on NRS 0-100 (TS). At baseline, during and after CS we assessed the electrically induced pain intensity and electrically evoked potentials recorded over the central electrode (Cz). Only in the 10 °C-condition, both pain (52.6 ± 4.4 (baseline) vs. 30.3 ± 12.5 (during CS)) and amplitudes of PCES-EP (42.1 ± 13.4 μV (baseline) vs. 28.7 ± 10.5 μV (during CS)) attenuated during CS and recovered there after (all p < 0.001). In the 10 °C-condition changes of subjective pain ratings during electrical stimulation and amplitudes of PCES-EP correlated significantly with each other (r = 0.5) and with CS pain intensity (r = 0.5). PCES-EPs are a quantitative measure of pain relief, as changes in the electrophysiological response are paralleled by a consistent decrease in subjective pain ratings. This novel CPM paradigm is a feasible method, which could help to evaluate the function of the endogenous pain modulation processes. German Clinical Trials Register DRKS-ID: DRKS00012779 , retrospectively registered on 24 July 2017.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 75 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 12 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 16%
Student > Bachelor 10 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Researcher 4 5%
Other 9 12%
Unknown 24 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 12 16%
Medicine and Dentistry 10 13%
Neuroscience 8 11%
Engineering 4 5%
Psychology 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 34 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 March 2018.
All research outputs
#20,468,008
of 23,026,672 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neurology
#2,162
of 2,460 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#275,897
of 315,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neurology
#36
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,026,672 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,460 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 315,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.