ArticleJournal of oral & facial pain and headache2024
Tell me what to expect: how instructions affect the pain response of patients with chronic myofascial pain with referral.
Article in Journal of oral & facial pain and headache, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aims of the study are to analyze the influence of pain and no pain expectations on the physiological (electromyography (EMG) and pupillometry) and cognitive (Numerical Rating Scale (NRS)) response to pain. Pain expectation and no pain expectation situations were induced by employing instructional videos. The induction of pain was performed by palpating the masseter with an algometer in a sample of 2 groups: 30 healthy participants (control group) and 30 patients (Temporomandibular disorders (TMD) group) with chronic myofascial pain with referral in the masseter muscle (Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Dissorders (DC/TMD)). Used a mixed design all participants were exposed to pain and no pain conditions in the same session, but the order of the presentation was counterbalanced across participants to control its possible influence. A significantly larger pupillary diameter was observed in the pain expectation relative to the no pain expectation condition in both groups. The TMD group presented larger EMG activity and larger scores in anxiety, somatization, catastrophizing and central sensitization than the control group. In the NRS, the TMD group also showed a significantly higher score than the control group. The TMD group presented similar NRS scores in the expectation condition compared to the no pain expectation condition, while the control group presented higher scores for pain expectation than for no pain expectation. Pain expectation modulated the pain cognitive pain assessment and pupil diameter in controls. The cognitive pain assessment was altered in the TMD group compared to the control group, particularly in the no pain expectation condition, this may be due to a negative reappraisal of pain due to past experiences, as pointed out by the observed level of catastrophizing. Pain expectations did not influence the EMG, significantly higher EMG activity was found in the TMD group compared to the control group regardless of expectation type.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.