Quantitative sensory assessments of musculoskeletal pain using pressure algometry require, as for assessing neuropathic pain, two different disciplines where the first is standardised stimulation of deep-tissue nociceptors, and the second is standardised quantification of the evoked pain sensation. Both of those disciplines can introduce variability and hence hamper the reliability of the method.1Reliability, specificity, and sensitivity of quantitative sensory testing (QST)Quantitative sensory testing (QST) is being applied more and more frequently in clinical studies for profiling pain patients or for profiling the mode-of-action of new/existing analgesics. Advanced QST profiling can provide a better understanding of the mechanisms involved in pain transduction, transmission, and perception under normal and pathophysiological conditions and provide the basis for mechanism-based diagnosis, prevention, and management of pain. Before such tests can be applied in clinical trials, the reliability, specificity, and sensitivity have to be known. Furthermore, QST techniques by nature rely on subjective responses from the person being tested which is introducing uncertainties and variation. However, some of the techniques, e.g. hand help pressure algometry, also rely on how the experimenter/rater is doing the tests.2Documenting variability caused by the person doing pressure pain measurementsValidating such variability, although important, is often not prioritised as it takes
Scandinavian Journal of Pain – de Gruyter
Published: Oct 1, 2015
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera