Thermal and pressure pain sensitivity in patients with unilateral shoulder pain

Comparison of involved and uninvolved sides

Rogelio A. Coronado, Lindsay L. Kindler, Carolina Valencia, Steven Z. George

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. BACKGROUND: In the examination of patients with unilateral shoulder pain, pain provocation testing to compare the involved and uninvolved sides has been considered useful. However, side-to-side comparisons of experimental pain sensitivity in patients with unilateral shoulder pain are not widely reported in the literature. OBJECTIVES: To compare experimental pain sensitivity between the involved and uninvolved sides in patients with unilateral shoulder pain. METHODS: In consecutive patients seeking operative treatment for shoulder pain, sensitivity measures of bilateral pressure pain threshold at the shoulder and forearm, and thermal pain threshold, tolerance, and temporal summation at the forearm, were examined. Pressure sensitivity was tested with a Fischer pressure algometer, and thermal sensitivity with a computer-controlled Medoc neurosensory analyzer. The involved and uninvolved sides were compared with an analysis of variance. Influence of sex and location of testing were considered as covariates in the analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-nine consecutively recruited participants completed experimental pain sensitivity testing. Participants reported significantly lower pressure pain thresholds in the involved side compared to the uninvolved side (F 1,56 = 4.96, P = .030). In addition, female compared to male participants demonstrated lower pressure pain thresholds in the bilateral shoulder regions (F 1,56 = 10.84, P = .002). There was no difference in thermal pain sensitivity between sides. Average clinical pain intensity was negatively correlated with pressure pain threshold at the involved local site (r = -0.284, P = .029), indicating an influence of clinical pain intensity on local pressure pain. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide evidence for higher experimental pressure pain sensitivity in the involved side of patients with unilateral shoulder pain and no difference between sides for thermal pain sensitivity. Females demonstrated higher pain sensitivity than males to pressure stimuli at the local shoulder region but not at the distal regions. Future studies should incorporate multiple stimuli when describing the pain profile of clinical populations. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2011;41(3):165-173, Epub 10 November 2010.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)165-173
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy
Volume41
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Shoulder Pain
Hot Temperature
Pressure
Pain
Pain Threshold
Forearm
Sports
Analysis of Variance

Keywords

  • Clinical examination
  • Pain
  • Shoulderl

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation

Cite this

Thermal and pressure pain sensitivity in patients with unilateral shoulder pain : Comparison of involved and uninvolved sides. / Coronado, Rogelio A.; Kindler, Lindsay L.; Valencia, Carolina; George, Steven Z.

In: Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy, Vol. 41, No. 3, 03.2011, p. 165-173.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Coronado, Rogelio A. ; Kindler, Lindsay L. ; Valencia, Carolina ; George, Steven Z. / Thermal and pressure pain sensitivity in patients with unilateral shoulder pain : Comparison of involved and uninvolved sides. In: Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy. 2011 ; Vol. 41, No. 3. pp. 165-173.
@article{45eb2f655d00416cba5c3dbe9d5bcf32,
title = "Thermal and pressure pain sensitivity in patients with unilateral shoulder pain: Comparison of involved and uninvolved sides",
abstract = "STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. BACKGROUND: In the examination of patients with unilateral shoulder pain, pain provocation testing to compare the involved and uninvolved sides has been considered useful. However, side-to-side comparisons of experimental pain sensitivity in patients with unilateral shoulder pain are not widely reported in the literature. OBJECTIVES: To compare experimental pain sensitivity between the involved and uninvolved sides in patients with unilateral shoulder pain. METHODS: In consecutive patients seeking operative treatment for shoulder pain, sensitivity measures of bilateral pressure pain threshold at the shoulder and forearm, and thermal pain threshold, tolerance, and temporal summation at the forearm, were examined. Pressure sensitivity was tested with a Fischer pressure algometer, and thermal sensitivity with a computer-controlled Medoc neurosensory analyzer. The involved and uninvolved sides were compared with an analysis of variance. Influence of sex and location of testing were considered as covariates in the analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-nine consecutively recruited participants completed experimental pain sensitivity testing. Participants reported significantly lower pressure pain thresholds in the involved side compared to the uninvolved side (F 1,56 = 4.96, P = .030). In addition, female compared to male participants demonstrated lower pressure pain thresholds in the bilateral shoulder regions (F 1,56 = 10.84, P = .002). There was no difference in thermal pain sensitivity between sides. Average clinical pain intensity was negatively correlated with pressure pain threshold at the involved local site (r = -0.284, P = .029), indicating an influence of clinical pain intensity on local pressure pain. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide evidence for higher experimental pressure pain sensitivity in the involved side of patients with unilateral shoulder pain and no difference between sides for thermal pain sensitivity. Females demonstrated higher pain sensitivity than males to pressure stimuli at the local shoulder region but not at the distal regions. Future studies should incorporate multiple stimuli when describing the pain profile of clinical populations. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2011;41(3):165-173, Epub 10 November 2010.",
keywords = "Clinical examination, Pain, Shoulderl",
author = "Coronado, {Rogelio A.} and Kindler, {Lindsay L.} and Carolina Valencia and George, {Steven Z.}",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
doi = "10.2519/jospt.2011.3416",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "41",
pages = "165--173",
journal = "Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy",
issn = "0190-6011",
publisher = "JOSPT",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Thermal and pressure pain sensitivity in patients with unilateral shoulder pain

T2 - Comparison of involved and uninvolved sides

AU - Coronado, Rogelio A.

AU - Kindler, Lindsay L.

AU - Valencia, Carolina

AU - George, Steven Z.

PY - 2011/3

Y1 - 2011/3

N2 - STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. BACKGROUND: In the examination of patients with unilateral shoulder pain, pain provocation testing to compare the involved and uninvolved sides has been considered useful. However, side-to-side comparisons of experimental pain sensitivity in patients with unilateral shoulder pain are not widely reported in the literature. OBJECTIVES: To compare experimental pain sensitivity between the involved and uninvolved sides in patients with unilateral shoulder pain. METHODS: In consecutive patients seeking operative treatment for shoulder pain, sensitivity measures of bilateral pressure pain threshold at the shoulder and forearm, and thermal pain threshold, tolerance, and temporal summation at the forearm, were examined. Pressure sensitivity was tested with a Fischer pressure algometer, and thermal sensitivity with a computer-controlled Medoc neurosensory analyzer. The involved and uninvolved sides were compared with an analysis of variance. Influence of sex and location of testing were considered as covariates in the analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-nine consecutively recruited participants completed experimental pain sensitivity testing. Participants reported significantly lower pressure pain thresholds in the involved side compared to the uninvolved side (F 1,56 = 4.96, P = .030). In addition, female compared to male participants demonstrated lower pressure pain thresholds in the bilateral shoulder regions (F 1,56 = 10.84, P = .002). There was no difference in thermal pain sensitivity between sides. Average clinical pain intensity was negatively correlated with pressure pain threshold at the involved local site (r = -0.284, P = .029), indicating an influence of clinical pain intensity on local pressure pain. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide evidence for higher experimental pressure pain sensitivity in the involved side of patients with unilateral shoulder pain and no difference between sides for thermal pain sensitivity. Females demonstrated higher pain sensitivity than males to pressure stimuli at the local shoulder region but not at the distal regions. Future studies should incorporate multiple stimuli when describing the pain profile of clinical populations. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2011;41(3):165-173, Epub 10 November 2010.

AB - STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional. BACKGROUND: In the examination of patients with unilateral shoulder pain, pain provocation testing to compare the involved and uninvolved sides has been considered useful. However, side-to-side comparisons of experimental pain sensitivity in patients with unilateral shoulder pain are not widely reported in the literature. OBJECTIVES: To compare experimental pain sensitivity between the involved and uninvolved sides in patients with unilateral shoulder pain. METHODS: In consecutive patients seeking operative treatment for shoulder pain, sensitivity measures of bilateral pressure pain threshold at the shoulder and forearm, and thermal pain threshold, tolerance, and temporal summation at the forearm, were examined. Pressure sensitivity was tested with a Fischer pressure algometer, and thermal sensitivity with a computer-controlled Medoc neurosensory analyzer. The involved and uninvolved sides were compared with an analysis of variance. Influence of sex and location of testing were considered as covariates in the analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-nine consecutively recruited participants completed experimental pain sensitivity testing. Participants reported significantly lower pressure pain thresholds in the involved side compared to the uninvolved side (F 1,56 = 4.96, P = .030). In addition, female compared to male participants demonstrated lower pressure pain thresholds in the bilateral shoulder regions (F 1,56 = 10.84, P = .002). There was no difference in thermal pain sensitivity between sides. Average clinical pain intensity was negatively correlated with pressure pain threshold at the involved local site (r = -0.284, P = .029), indicating an influence of clinical pain intensity on local pressure pain. CONCLUSION: The results of this study provide evidence for higher experimental pressure pain sensitivity in the involved side of patients with unilateral shoulder pain and no difference between sides for thermal pain sensitivity. Females demonstrated higher pain sensitivity than males to pressure stimuli at the local shoulder region but not at the distal regions. Future studies should incorporate multiple stimuli when describing the pain profile of clinical populations. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2011;41(3):165-173, Epub 10 November 2010.

KW - Clinical examination

KW - Pain

KW - Shoulderl

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79952979154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79952979154&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2519/jospt.2011.3416

DO - 10.2519/jospt.2011.3416

M3 - Article

VL - 41

SP - 165

EP - 173

JO - Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy

JF - Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy

SN - 0190-6011

IS - 3

ER -