PDF(Pubmed)
Abstract：
Objective: The aim of this study is to assess whether pain-inducing manual pressure (PIMP) leads to effects on pressure pain threshold (PPT) mediated by conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and whether these effects are influenced by the intensity and repetition of the stimulus. Additionally, the influence of psychological factors and physical activity on the response to PIMP was explored. Methods: A total of 72 pain-free students were randomly assigned to three crossover trials. Trial 1 compared the effects of PIMP with the cold pressor task and pain-inducing electrostimulation. Trial 2 compared the effects of manual pressure that elicited moderate pain, mild pain, and no pain. Trial 3 compared a single PIMP stimulation with four stimuli applied at the same site or at different sites. Results: PIMP produced a lower increase in PPT than cold pressor task and no difference with electrostimulation. Manual pressure that caused moderate pain led to a greater increase in PPT compared to mild pain and pain-free application. Repetition of PIMP stimulus, whether at the same or different sites, did not significantly increase PPT compared to a single stimulation. No association with psychological factors or physical activity was found. Conclusions: PIMP produces an increase in PPT, suggesting the involvement of CPM-related mechanisms.
摘要：
目的：本研究的目的是评估疼痛诱发手动压力（PIMP）是否会导致条件性疼痛调节（CPM）介导的压力痛阈值（PPT）的影响，以及这些影响是否受到强度和重复的影响刺激。此外,探讨了心理因素和体力活动对PIMP反应的影响。方法：将72名无痛学生随机分配到3项交叉试验中。试验1比较了PIMP与冷加压任务和疼痛诱导电刺激的效果。试验2比较了引起中度疼痛的手动压力的效果，轻度疼痛,也没有疼痛.试验3比较了单个PIMP刺激与在相同部位或不同部位施加的四个刺激。结果：PIMP产生的PPT增加低于冷加压任务，与电刺激无差异。与轻度疼痛和无痛应用相比，引起中度疼痛的手动压力导致PPT增加更大。重复PIMP刺激，无论是在相同或不同的网站，与单次刺激相比，PPT没有显着增加。未发现与心理因素或身体活动有关。结论：PIMP产生PPT的增加，表明CPM相关机制的参与。
