Article Data

  • Views 408
  • Dowloads 72

Original Research

Open Access

Experimental Psychological Stress on Quantitative Sensory Testing Response in Patients with Temporomandibular Disorders

  • Dyna Mara Araújo Oliveira Ferreira1
  • Yuri Martins Costa1,*,
  • Henrique Müller de Quevedo1
  • Leonardo Rigoldi Bonjardim1
  • Paulo César Rodrigues Conti1

1Univ Sao Paulo, Dept Prosthodont, Bauru Sch Dent, Bauru, Brazil

2Univ Sao Paulo, Bauru Orofacial Pain Grp, Al Octavio Pinheiro Brisola 9-75, BR-17012901 Bauru, Brazil

3Univ Sao Paulo, Sect Head & Face Physiol, Dept Biol Sci, Bauru Sch Dent, Al Octavio Pinheiro Brisola 9-75, BR-17012901 Bauru, Brazil

DOI: 10.11607/ofph.2046 Vol.32,Issue 4,December 2018 pp.428-435

Published: 30 December 2018

*Corresponding Author(s): Yuri Martins Costa E-mail: yurimartinscosta@yahoo.com.br

Abstract

Aims: To assess the modulatory effects of experimental psychological stress on the somatosensory evaluation of myofascial temporomandibular disorder (TMD) patients. Methods: A total of 20 women with myofascial TMD and 20 age-matched healthy women were assessed by means of a standardized battery of quantitative sensory testing. Cold detection threshold (CDT), warm detection threshold (WDT), cold pain threshold (CPT), heat pain threshold (HPT), mechanical pain threshold (MPT), wind-up ratio (WUR), and pressure pain threshold (PPT) were performed on the facial skin overlying the masseter muscle. The variables were measured in three sessions: before (baseline) and immediately after the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task (PASAT) (stress) and then after a washout period of 20 to 30 minutes (poststress). Mixed analysis of variance (ANOVA) was applied to the data, and the significance level was set at P = .050. Results: A significant main effect of the experimental session on all thermal tests was found (ANOVA: F > 4.10, P < .017), where detection tests presented an increase in thresholds in the poststress session compared to baseline (CDT, P = .012; WDT, P = .040) and pain thresholds were reduced in the stress (CPT, P < .001; HPT, P = .001) and poststress sessions (CPT, P = .005; HPT, P = .006) compared to baseline. In addition, a significant main effect of the study group on all mechanical tests (MPT, WUR, and PPT) was found (ANOVA: F > 4.65, P < .037), where TMD patients were more sensitive than healthy volunteers. Conclusion: Acute mental stress conditioning can modulate thermal sensitivity of the skin overlying the masseter in myofascial TMD patients and healthy volunteers. Therefore, psychological stress should be considered in order to perform an unbiased somatosensory assessment of TMD patients.

Keywords

myofascial pain;pain sensitivity;psychological stress;quantitative sensory testing;temporomandibular disorders

Cite and Share

Dyna Mara Araújo Oliveira Ferreira,Yuri Martins Costa,Henrique Müller de Quevedo,Leonardo Rigoldi Bonjardim,Paulo César Rodrigues Conti. Experimental Psychological Stress on Quantitative Sensory Testing Response in Patients with Temporomandibular Disorders. Journal of Oral & Facial Pain and Headache. 2018. 32(4);428-435.

References

1.de Leeuw R, Klasser GD (eds). Diagnosis and management of TMDs. In: Orofacial Pain: Guidelines for Assessment, Diagnosis, and Management, ed 5. Chicago: Quintessence, 2013:127–185.

2.National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research. Facial Pain. http://www.nidcr.nih.gov/DataStatistics/FindDataByTo-pic/FacialPain/. Accessed 2 April 2018.

3.Durham J, Shen J, Breckons M, et al. Healthcare cost and im-pact of persistent orofacial pain: The DEEP study cohort. J Dent Res 2016;95:1147–1154.

4.Lobbezoo F, Drangsholt M, Peck C, Sato H, Kopp S, Svensson P. Topical review: New insights into the pathology and diagno-sis of disorders of the temporomandibular joint. J Orofac Pain 2004;18:181–191.

5.Woolf CJ. Central sensitization: Implications for the diagnosis and treatment of pain. Pain 2011;152(suppl):s2–s15.

6.Kothari SF, Baad-Hansen L, Oono Y, Svensson P. Somatosen-sory assessment and conditioned pain modulation in temporo-mandibular disorders pain patients. Pain 2015;156:2545–2555.

7.Yang G, Baad-Hansen L, Wang K, Fu K, Xie QF, Svensson P. Somatosensory abnormalities in Chinese patients with painful temporomandibular disorders. J Headache Pain 2016;17:31.

8.Pfau DB, Rolke R, Nickel R, Treede RD, Daublaender M. So-matosensory profiles in subgroups of patients with myogenic temporomandibular disorders and Fibromyalgia Syndrome. Pain 2009;147:72–83.

9.Backonja MM, Attal N, Baron R, et al. Value of quantitative sen-sory testing in neurological and pain disorders: NeuPSIG con-sensus. Pain 2013;154:1807–1819.

10.Pavlakovic G, Petzke F. The role of quantitative sensory testing in the evaluation of musculoskeletal pain conditions. Curr Rheu-matol Rep 2010;12:455–461.

11.Rolke R, Magerl W, Campbell KA, et al. Quantitative sensory testing: A comprehensive protocol for clinical trials. Eur J Pain 2006;10:77–88.

12.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.

13.Backonja MM, Walk D, Edwards RR, et al. Quantitative senso-ry testing in measurement of neuropathic pain phenomena and other sensory abnormalities. Clin J Pain 2009;25:641–647.

14.Costa YM, Morita-Neto O, de Araújo-Júnior EN, Sampaio FA, Conti PC, Bonjardim LR. Test-retest reliability of quantitative sensory testing for mechanical somatosensory and pain modula-tion assessment of masticatory structures. J Oral Rehabil 2017; 44:197–204.

15.Marcuzzi A, Wrigley PJ, Dean CM, Adams R, Hush JM. The long-term reliability of static and dynamic quantitative sensory testing in healthy individuals. Pain 2017;158:1217–1223.

16.Yilmaz P, Diers M, Diener S, Rance M, Wessa M, Flor H. Brain correlates of stress-induced analgesia. Pain 2010;151:522–529.

17.Jennings EM, Okine BN, Roche M, Finn DP. Stress-induced hy-peralgesia. Prog Neurobiol 2014;121:1–18.

18.Racine M, Tousignant-Laflamme Y, Kloda LA, Dion D, Dupuis G, Choinière M. A systematic literature review of 10 years of research on sex/gender and experimental pain perception—Part 1: Are there really differences between women and men?Pain 2012;153:602–618.

19.Dworkin SF, LeResche L. Research diagnostic criteria for tem-poromandibular disorders: Review, criteria, examinations and specifications, critique. J Craniomandib Disord 1992;6:301–355.

20.Luft CD, Sanches Sde O, Mazo GZ, Andrade A. Brazilian version of the Perceived Stress Scale: Translation and validation for the elderly [in Portuguese]. Rev Saude Publica 2007;41:606–615.

21.Gorenstein C, Andrade L. Validation of a Portuguese version of the Beck Depression Inventory and the State-Trait Anxi-ety Inventory in Brazilian subjects. Braz J Med Biol Res 1996; 29:453–457.

22.Sehn F, Chachamovich E, Vidor LP, et al. Cross-cultural adapta-tion and validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the pain catastrophizing scale. Pain Med 2012;13:1425–1435.

23.Tanosoto T, Arima T, Tomonaga A, Ohata N, Svensson P. A Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task evokes stress and differ-ential effects on masseter-muscle activity and haemodynamics. Eur J Oral Sci 2012;120:363–367.

24.Tanosoto T, Bendixen KH, Arima T, Hansen J, Terkelsen AJ, Svensson P. Effects of the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task (PASAT) with different rates on autonomic nervous system re-sponses and self-reported levels of stress. J Oral Rehabil 2015; 42:378–385.

25.Gronwall DM. Paced auditory serial-addition task: A measure of recovery from concussion. Percept Mot Skills 1977;44:367–373.

26.Lustyk MK, Olson KC, Gerrish WG, Holder A, Widman L. Psy-chophysiological and neuroendocrine responses to laboratory stressors in women: Implications of menstrual cycle phase and stressor type. Biol Psychol 2010;83:84–92.

27.Gordon CJ. Thermal biology of the laboratory rat. Physiol Behav 1990;47:963–991.

28.Vianna DM, Carrive P. Changes in cutaneous and body tem-perature during and after conditioned fear to context in the rat. Eur J Neurosci 2005;21:2505–2512.

29.Crettaz B, Marziniak M, Willeke P, et al. Stress-induced allodyn-ia—Evidence of increased pain sensitivity in healthy humans and patients with chronic pain after experimentally induced psycho-social stress. Plos One 2013;8:e69460.

30.Bierman W. The temperature of the skin surface. JAMA 1936; 106:1158–1162.

31.Reinhardt T, Kleindienst N, Treede RD, Bohus M, Schmahl C. Individual modulation of pain sensitivity under stress. Pain Med 2013;14:676–685.

32.Rhudy JL, Meagher MW. Fear and anxiety: Divergent effects on human pain thresholds. Pain 2000;84:65–75.

33.Rhudy JL, Williams AE, McCabe KM, Russell JL, Maynard LJ. Emotional control of nociceptive reactions (ECON): Do affective valence and arousal play a role? Pain 2008;136:250–261.

34.Marsland AL, Walsh C, Lockwood K, John-Henderson NA. The effects of acute psychological stress on circulating and stimu-lated inflammatory markers: A systematic review and meta-anal-ysis. Brain Behav Immun 2017;64:208–219.

35.Donello JE, Guan Y, Tian M, et al. A peripheral adrenoceptor-me-diated sympathetic mechanism can transform stress-induced an-algesia into hyperalgesia. Anesthesiology 2011;114:1403–1416.

36.Hilgenberg-Sydney PB, Kowacs PA, Conti PC. Somatosensory evaluation in Dysfunctional Syndrome patients. J Oral Rehabil 2016;43:89–95.

37.Herrero JF, Laird JM, López-García JA. Wind-up of spinal cord neurones and pain sensation: Much ado about something? Prog Neurobiol 2000;61:169–203.

38.Marcuzzi A, Wrigley PJ, Dean CM, Adams R, Hush JM. The long-term reliability of static and dynamic quantitative sensory testing in healthy individuals. Pain 2017;158:1217–1223.

39.Bergdahl J, Bergdahl M. Perceived stress in adults: Prevalence and association of depression, anxiety and medication in a Swedish population. Stress Health 2002;18:235–241.

Abstracted / indexed in

Science Citation Index (SCI)

Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE)

BIOSIS Previews

Scopus

Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL)

Submission Turnaround Time

Conferences

Top