Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38894860›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain research2024

Pupillometry as a Potential Objective Measurement of Pain Assessment in Healthy Volunteers.

Janika Krafthöfer, Sophie-Charlotte Fabig, Ralf Baron, Janne Gierthmühlen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Janika KrafthöferDivision of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.ORCID 0009-0001-9063-2284
Sophie-Charlotte FabigDivision of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.
Ralf BaronDivision of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-9492-4698
Janne GierthmühlenDivision of Neurological Pain Research and Therapy, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2160-5503

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Pain leads to activation of the autonomic nervous system and thus, among other things, to pupillary reflex dilation (PRD). Previous studies have already confirmed a correlation between the perception of pain and the pupillary reaction, measured using pupillometry. However, the previous study populations were under the influence of medication for analgesia in perioperative setting or suffered from pain. This study examines the relationship between pupillary reaction and pain perception in healthy controls and addresses the question of whether endogenous pain inhibition, clinically tested by conditioned pain modulation (CPM), can be quantified using pupillometry. Methods: Forty-two healthy volunteers (21 females, 21 males, mean age 27.9 ± 5.8 years, range 20-39 years) were included in this study. The PRD, as a measure of the pupillary reaction (variance from the base diameter in percent), was investigated during baseline, heat application and during CPM testing and results compared to the reported pain intensity on the numerical rating scale (NRS). Results: The volunteers showed higher variances under painful conditions compared to the measurement at rest corresponding to higher sympathetic activity during pain. Volunteers with a higher variance, ie a stronger pupillary reaction, gave higher pain ratings than subjects with a lower pupil variance. However, there was no correlation between the NRS and PRD. PRD and pain ratings during CPM were significantly lower compared to heat pain application alone. However, there was no correlation between the calculated CPM effect and the PRD. Conclusion: Pupillometry is capable of objectively reflecting the pain response, eg pain relief through CPM testing. However, the CPM effect calculated from the subjective pain ratings and the objective PRD measurements is not associated suggesting that both measure different aspects of pain perception. It must be discussed whether the CPM effect can be the correct measure for the functionality of the pain system.

Indexed as

conditioned pain modulationdescending controlpainpupillary reactionsympathetic nervous system

Identifiers

PMID38894860
PMCPMC11182876

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.