Application of a New Palpometer for Intraoral Mechanical Pain Sensitivity Assessment

Aims: To investigate the reliability and magnitude of intraoral mechanical pain sensitivity by using a palpometer with add-on devices with different physical properties. Methods: Sixteen healthy volunteers participated. Three palpometers (0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 kg) were used. Add-on devices were put on the circular metal stamp of the palpometer. Four diameters (3, 4, 5, and 10 mm) and two shapes of the rubber-top (flat and round) of the add-on devices were tested at each force level, ie, a total of 24 combinations. Participants were stimulated at the gingival mucosa around the maxillary central incisors and first molars on both sides by using the palpometers in randomized order. Participants rated perceived stimulus intensity on a 0-50-100 numerical rating scale (NRS). Ten volunteers were examined twice on the same day and recalled for a second session for assessment of within- and between-session reliability. Intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated for reliability measures, and NRS scores were analyzed with analysis of variance. Results: Reliability of NRS scores was excellent (interclass correlation coefficients 0.76 to 0.99). Analysis of NRS values corrected for pressure level revealed that there were main effects of site (P = .006), force (P < .001), size (P < .001), and shape (P < .001) but not side (P = .051). Conclusion: Reliability of intraoral novel palpometer measures of pressure sensitivity was excellent, and sensitivity to pressure stimulation was dependent on the applied force and physical properties of the add-on device. The study indicated that semi-quantitative assessment of intraoral mechanical sensitivity is feasible and could be applied in further studies on different intraoral pain conditions.

intraoral; pressure; quantitative sensory testing; somatosensory sensitivity

1. Melis M, Lobo SL, ceneviz c, et al. atypical odontalgia: a review of the literature. Headache 2003;43:1060–1074.

2. Pigg M, Baad-Hansen L, Svensson P, Drangsholt M, List T. reliability of intraoral quantitative sensory testing (QST). Pain 2010;148:220–226.

3. Geber c, Klein T, rolke r, et al. Test/retest- and interob- server-reliability in quantitative sensory testing according to the protocol on the German network on neuropathic pain (DfnS). Eur J Pain 2007;11:587.

4. Baad-Hansen L, Staehelin Jensen T, Svensson P. a human model of intraoral pain and heat hyperalgesia. J Orofac Pain 2003;17:333–340.

5. Svensson P, Baad-Hansen L, Pigg M, et al. Guidelines and recommendations for assessment of somatosensory function in oro-facial pain conditions: a taskforce report. J Oral rehabil 2011;38:366–394.

6. Baad-Hansen L, List T, Jensen TS, Svensson P. increased pain sensitivity to intraoral capsaicin in patients with atypical odontalgia. J Orofac Pain 2006;20:107–114.

7. futarmal S, Kothari M, ayesh E, Baad-Hansen L, Svensson

P. new palpometer with implications for assessment of deep pain sensitivity. J Dent res 2011;90:918–922.

8. Kothari Sf, Kothari M, Baad-Hansen L, Svensson P. comparison of techniques for evaluation of deep pain sensitivity in the craniofacial region. J Orofac Pain 2012;26:225–232.

9. Shrout PE, fleiss JL. intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979;86:420–428.

10. reeves JL, Jaeger B, Graff-radford SB. reliability of the pressure algometer as a measure of myofascial trigger point sensitivity. Pain 1986;24:313–321.

11. List T, Helkimo M, falk G. reliability and validity of a pressure threshold meter in recording tenderness in the masseter muscle and the anterior temporalis muscle. cranio 1989;7:223–229.

12. Ohrbach r, Gale En. Pressure pain thresholds in normal muscle: reliability, measurement effects, and topographic differences. Pain 1989;37:257–263.

13. chung Sc, Kim JH, Kim HS. reliability and validity of the pressure pain thresholds (PPT) in the TMJ capsules by electronic algometer. cranio 1993;11:171–176.

14. Bernhardt O, Schiffman EL, Look JO. reliability and validity of a new fingertip-shaped pressure algometer for assessing pressure pain thresholds in the temporomandibular joint and masticatory muscles. J Orofac Pain 2007;21:29–38.

15. Ogimoto T, Ogawa T, Sumiyoshi K, Matsuka Y, Koyano K. Pressure-pain threshold determination in the oral mucosa: Validity and reliability. J Oral rehabil 2002;29:620–626.

16. antonaci f, Sand T, Lucas Ga. Pressure algometry in healthy subjects: inter-examiner variability. Scand J rehabil Med 1998;30:3–8.

17. List T, Helkimo M, falk G. reliability and validity of a pressure threshold meter in recording tenderness in the masseter muscle and the anterior temporalis muscle. cranio 1989;7:223–229.

18. McMillan aS. Pain-pressure threshold in human gingivae. J Orofac Pain 1995;9:44–50.

19. McMillan aS, Walshaw D. Pressure - pain threshold in the human tongue. J Orofac Pain 2000;14:93–97.

20. Davenport Jc. Pressure-pain threshold in the oral cavity in man. arch Oral Biol 1969;14:1267–1274.

21. Greenspan JD, McGillis SL. Thresholds for the perception of pressure, sharpness, and mechanically evoked cutaneous pain: Effects of laterality and repeated testing. Somatosens Mot res 1994;11:311–317.

22. Greenspan JD, McGillis SL. Stimulus features relevant to the perception of sharpness and mechanically evoked cutaneous pain. Somatosens Mot res 1991;8:137–147.

23. rapp r, Kirstine WD, avery JK. a study of the multiplicity of nerve endings in the human gingiva and periodontal membrane. J can Dent assoc 1957;23:637–643.

24. Dixon aD. The position, incidence and origin of sensory nerve termination in oral mucous membrane. arch Oral Biol 1962;7:39–48.