ArticlePloS one2025
Strength, extent and duration of secondary hyperalgesia induced by high-frequency electrical stimulation of the foot compared to the volar forearm of healthy human volunteers.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-frequency electrical stimulation (HFS) of the skin using a multi-pin electrode activating epidermal nociceptors is used to explore spinal central sensitization in humans. Most previous studies applied HFS to the volar forearm. To prepare for clinical applications in which HFS could be applied to different body sites, this study compared the secondary hyperalgesia induced by stimulation of the foot dorsum vs. the forearm in 32 healthy volunteers. HFS consisted in five 1-s trains of 100 Hz pulses (inter-train interval: 10 s; intensity: 20x detection threshold) delivered via a novel electrode optimized for stimulation of different body sites (ten 0.25 mm pins in a 5-mm circle). Pinprick sensitivity was assessed before HFS and 30-240 minutes after HFS, at the treated site and the corresponding contralateral site. The area of hyperalgesia was quantified. HFS to the foot induced a significant increase in pinprick sensitivity of the surrounding skin, similar in magnitude to the increase at the forearm, and decaying similarly over time (half-lives 150 vs. 221 min). The radius of secondary hyperalgesia was smaller at the foot (22 mm) compared to the forearm (38 mm, p < 0.001), and decreased more rapidly over time (53 vs. 87 min, p < 0.01). Our results show that strength of HFS-induced secondary hyperalgesia can be used as indicator of spinal central sensitization across body sites, and thereby profile patients with localized or regional pain conditions. The size of the area of hyperalgesia may depend on innervation density and peripheral receptive field sizes.
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.