Movement does not promote recovery of motor output following acute experimental muscle pain

Objective. To examine the effect of motor activity on the magnitude and duration of altered corticomotor output following experimental muscle pain. Design. Experimental, pre-post test. Setting. University laboratory. Subjects. Twenty healthy individuals. Methods. Participants were randomly allocated to a Rest or Movement group. The Rest group sat quietly without moving for the duration of the experiment. The Movement group repeated a unimanual pattern of five sequential keystrokes as quickly and as accurately as possible immediately following the resolution of pain. Pain was induced into the right extensor carpi radialis brevis muscle by a bolus injection of 0.5 mL hypertonic saline. Corticomotor output was assessed as motor evoked potentials in response to transcranial magnetic stimulation before, immediately after, and at 10, 20, and 30 minutes following pain resolution. Pain intensity was recorded every 30 seconds using an 11-point numerical rating scale. Results. There was no difference in peak pain intensity (P < 0.09) or duration (P < 0.2) between groups. Corticomotor output was reduced in both groups (P < 0.002) at 10 minutes (P < 0.002), 20 minutes (P < 0.02), and 30 minutes (P < 0.037) following the resolution of pain relative to baseline. There was no difference between groups at any time point. Conclusions. Performance of motor activity immediately following the resolution of acute muscle pain did not alter the magnitude or duration of corticomotor depression. Understanding corticomotor depression in the postpain period and what factors promote recovery has relevance for clinical pain syndromes where ongoing motor dysfunction, in the absence of pain, may predispose to symptom persistence or recurrence

Long-term consistency of clinical sensory testing measures for pain assessment

Background: Understanding the stability of quantitative sensory tests (QSTs) over time is important to aid clinicians in selecting a battery of tests for assessing and monitoring patients. This study evaluated the short- and long-term reliability of selected QSTs. Methods: Twenty healthy women participated in three experimental sessions: Baseline, 2 weeks, and 6 months. Measurements included pressure pain thresholds (PPT) in the neck, upper back, and leg; Pressure-cuff pain tolerance around the upper-arm; conditioned pain modulation during a pressure-cuff stimulus; and referred pain following a suprathreshold pressure stimulation. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and minimum detectable change (MDC) were calculated. Results: Reliability for PPT was excellent for all sites at 2 weeks (ICC, 0.96–0.99; MDC, 22–55 kPa) and from good to excellent at 6 months (ICC, 0.88–0.95; MDC, 47–91 kPa). ICC for pressure-cuff pain tolerance indicated excellent reliability at both times (0.91–0.97). For conditioned pain modulation, reliability was moderate for all sites at 2 weeks (ICC, 0.57–0.74; MDC, 24%–35%), while it was moderate at the neck (ICC, 0.54; MDC, 27%) and poor at the upper back and leg at 6 months. ICC for referred pain areas was excellent at 2 weeks (0.90) and good at 6 months (0.86). Conclusions: PPT, pressure pain tolerance, and pressure-induced referred pain should be considered reliable procedures to assess the pain-sensory profile over time. In contrast, conditioned pain modulation was shown to be unstable. Future studies prospectively analyzing the pain-sensory profile will be able to better calculate appropriate sample sizes