Assessment of Mechanical Pain Thresholds in the Orofacial Region: A Comparison Between Pinprick Stimulators and Electronic Von Frey Device

Aims: To compare mechanical pain thresholds (MPTs) in the orofacial region assessed with two different approaches: with an electronic von Frey (EvF) device and with custom-made weighted pinprick stimulators. The test-retest reliability, variability of MPTs, and time duration of each test were also compared, as well as the ability of each test to create stimulus-response (S-R) curves. Methods: A total of 16 healthy volunteers participated. The MPT and S-R curve measurements were done with the two different techniques at three sites: on the skin of the right cheek (face), on the buccal gingival mucosa of the right upper premolar region (gingiva), and on the tip of the tongue (tongue). The same protocol was repeated 1 to 2 weeks later to determine test-retest reliability. Results: The MPT measurements with the EvF device were significantly faster (74.4 ± 20.8 seconds) than those with the pinprick stimulators (196.1 ± 33.0 seconds; P < .001). The absolute MPT values obtained with the EvF device were significantly higher than the values obtained with the pinprick stimulators at all test sites (P < .001). MPTs assessed with the EvF device showed higher reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.77–0.94) than MPTs assessed with the pinprick stimulators (ICC = 0.57–0.84; P = .041). The reliability of the S-R curves was excellent for both methods with no significant differences between the methods (P = .403). Conclusion: This study indicates that MPTs tested in the orofacial region with the EvF device were significantly higher than MPTs tested with the pinprick stimulators. However, the EvF device can be used with higher reliability and less time consumption for assessment of MPTs in the orofacial region than the pinprick stimulator technique, and also allows comparable construction of S-R curves.

orofacial pain; quantitative sensory testing; reliability; somatosensory testing; variability

1. 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.

2. Rolke R, Baron R, Maier C, et al. Quantitative sensory testing in the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS): Standardized protocol and reference values. Pain 2006;123:231–243.

3. Svensson P, Baad-Hansen L, Drangsholt,D, Jääskeläinen SK. Neurosensory testing for assessment, diagnosis, and prediction of orofacial pain. In: Sessle BJ (au). Orofacial Pain: Recent Advances In Assessment, Management, and Understanding of Mechanisms. Washington, DC: IASP Press, 2014:1–22.

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

5. Melis M, Lobo SL, Ceneviz C, et al. Atypical odontalgia: A review of the literature. Headache 2003;43:1060–1074.

6. Geber C, Klein T, Azad S, et al. Test/retest and interobserver reliability of quantitative sensory testing according to the protocol of the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS). Pain 2011;152:548–556.

7. Baad-Hansen L, Pigg M, Ivanovic SE, et al. Intraoral somatosensory abnormalities in patients with atypical odontalgia--A controlled multicenter quantitative sensory testing study. Pain 2013;154:1287–1294.

8. 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.

9. Matos R, Wang K, Jensen JD, et al. Quantitative sensory testing in the trigeminal region: Site and gender differences. J Orofac Pain 2011;25:161–169.

10. Jääskeläinen SK. Clinical neurophysiology and quantitative sensory testing in the investigation of orofacial pain and sensory function. J Orofac Pain 2004;18:85–107.

11. Jääskeläinen SK. Neuropathic pain in the orofacial area. In: Olesen J, Jensen TS (eds). Frontiers in Headache Research, ed 14. From Basic Pain Mechanisms to Headache. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press, 2006:63–75.

12. Jääskeläinen SK. Traumatic nerve injury: Diagnosis, recovery, and risk factors for neuropathic pain. In: Castro-Lopes J, International Association for the Study of Pain (eds). Current Topics in Pain: 12th World Congress on Pain. Seattle: IASP Press, 2009:165–184.

13. Svensson P, Baad-Hansen L, Thygesen T, Juhl GI, Jensen TS. Overview on tools and methods to assess neuropathic trigeminal pain. J Orofac Pain 2004;18:332–338.

14. Cruccu G, Anand P, Attal N, et al. EFNS guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment. Eur J Neurol 2004;11:153–162.

15. Lu S, Baad-Hansen L, Zhang Z, Svensson P. Reliability of a new technique for intraoral mapping of the somatosensory sensitivity. Somatosens Mot Res 2013;30:30–36.

16. List T, Mojir K, Svensson P, Pigg M. A new protocol to evaluate the effect of topical anesthesia. Anesth Prog 2014;61:135–144.

17. Baumgärtner U, Magerl W, Klein T, Hopf HC, Treede RD. Neurogenic hyperalgesia versus painful hypoalgesia: Two distinct mechanisms of neuropathic pain. Pain 2002;96:141–151.

18. Chan AW, MacFarlane IA, Bowsher D, Campbell JA. Weighted needle pinprick sensory thresholds: A simple test of sensory function in diabetic peripheral neuropathy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1992;55:56–59.

19. Magerl W, Wilk SH, Treede RD. Secondary hyperalgesia and perceptual windup following intradermal injection of capsaicinin humans. Pain 1998;74:257–268.

20. Svensson P, Beydoun A, Morrow TJ, Casey KL. Human intramuscular and cutaneous pain: Psychophysical comparisons. Exp Brain Res 1997;114:390–392.

21. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 1979;86:420–428.

22. Yang G, Baad-Hansen L, Wang K, Xie QF, Svensson P. A study on variability of quantitative sensory testing in healthy participants and painful temporomandibular disorder patients. Somatosens Mot Res 2014;31:62–71.

23. Baad-Hansen L, Pigg M, Ivanovic SE, et al. Chairside intraoral qualitative somatosensory testing: Reliability and comparison between patients with atypical odontalgia and healthy controls. J Orofac Pain 2013;27:165–170.