a-quantitative-sensory-testing-paradigm-to-obtain-measures-pain

A Quantitative Sensory Testing Paradigm to Obtain Measures of Pain Processing in Patients Undergoing Breast Cancer Surgery

Chronic pain following surgery, persistent postsurgical pain, is an important highly prevalent condition contributing to significant symptom burden and ...

Radboud university medical center

The presence of nerve damage plays a key role in the development and prognosis of chronic pain states. Assessment of the presence and severity of a neuropathic pain component (NePC) is key in diagnosing chronic pain patients. Low back pain (LBP) and neck and shoulder pain (NSP) are highly prevalent and clinically important medical and societal problems in which a NePC is frequently present. The more severe the NePC, the worse the course of the pain, its prognosis and the results of treatment. Reliable and standardised diagnosis of the NePC remains difficult to achieve. Standardized and validated screening tools may help to reliably identify the NePC in individual chronic pain patients. The aim of this study is to validate the Dutch language versions of the PainDETECT Questionnaire (PDQ-Dlv) and the 'Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions' (DN4-Dlv) for use in primary and specialist medical care settings to screen for a NePC in patients with chronic pain due to (1) LBP, (2) NSP or (3) known peripheral nerve damage (PND).

Detecting the neuropathic pain component in the clinical setting: a study protocol for validation of screening instruments for the presence of a neuropathic pain component.

Neuropathic pain is clinically described as pain caused by a lesion or disease of the somatosensory nervous system. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of the Dutch version of the DN4, in a cross-sectional multicentre design, as a screening tool for detecting a neuropathic pain component in a large consecutive, not pre-stratified on basis of the target outcome, population of patients with chronic pain. Patients' pain was classified by two independent (pain-)physicians as the gold standard. The analysis was initially performed on the outcomes of those patients (n = 228 out of 291) in whom both physicians agreed in their pain classification. Compared to the gold standard the DN4 had a sensitivity of 75% and specificity of 76%. The DN4-symptoms (seven interview items) solely resulted in a sensitivity of 70% and a specificity of 67%. For the DN4-signs (three examination items) it was respectively 75% and 75%. In conclusion, because it seems that the DN4 helps to identify a neuropathic pain component in a consecutive population of patients with chronic pain in a moderate way, a comprehensive (physical-) examination by the physician is still obligate.

Hans Timmerman

Department of Anesthesiology,
Pain,
and Palliative Medicine,
Department of Anesthesiology, Pain, and Palliative Medicine

Radboud university medical center

A Quantitative Sensory Testing Paradigm to Obtain Measures of Pain Processing in Patients Undergoing Breast Cancer Surgery

Hans Timmerman

.css-o250i3{font-size:18px;font-family:Open Sans,sans-serif;line-height:21.6px;}Department of Anesthesiology,Pain,and Palliative Medicine,Department of Anesthesiology, Pain, and Palliative Medicine

Radboud university medical center

A Quantitative Sensory Testing Paradigm to Obtain Measures of Pain Processing in Patients Undergoing Breast Cancer Surgery

Department of Anesthesiology,
Pain,
and Palliative Medicine,
Department of Anesthesiology, Pain, and Palliative Medicine