Dataset Information

Is all validation equal? Evaluating sensory- and emotion-focused validation in the context of experimentally induced pain.

ABSTRACT: Validation has been examined in experimental and clinical settings, but examination of whether specific content of validation responses affect pain-related outcomes has not been considered. We examined the impact of sensory- or emotion-focused validation following a pain task. Participants (N = 140) were randomly assigned to one of three validation conditions (i.e. sensory, emotional, or neutral) and completed the cold pressor task (CPT). Participants provided self-report ratings of pain and affective-related variables. Subsequently, a researcher validated emotional, sensory, or no aspects of participants' experience. The CPT was repeated, as were the self-report ratings. No significant differences were observed across conditions in pain or affective outcomes. All conditions reported an increase in pain intensity and pain unpleasantness across CPT trials. These findings suggest validation content may not impact pain outcomes during painful experiences. Future directions to understanding the nuances of validation across interactions and settings are discussed.

SUBMITTER: Eskowich S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10492425 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Is all validation equal? Evaluating sensory- and emotion-focused validation in the context of experimentally induced pain.

Eskowich Sadie S Mackie Cayley C Wall Kayla M KM Gagnon Michelle M MM

Journal of health psychology 20230317 11

Validation has been examined in experimental and clinical settings, but examination of whether specific content of validation responses affect pain-related outcomes has not been considered. We examined the impact of sensory- or emotion-focused validation following a pain task. Participants (<i>N</i> = 140) were randomly assigned to one of three validation conditions (i.e. sensory, emotional, or neutral) and completed the cold pressor task (CPT). Participants provided self-report ratings of pain ...[more]

PMID: 36932664

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundIn unilateral neuropathic pain. e.g. after peripheral nerve injury, both positive and negative sensory signs occur often, accompanied by minor but equally directed contralateral sensory changes. To mimic this feature, we experimentally aimed to induce concomitant c-fibre sensitization and block in healthy subjects and analyzed the bilateral sensory changes by quantitative sensory testing (QST) using the protocol of the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain.MethodsTwenty eight healthy subjects were firstly randomized in 2 groups to receive either topical capsaicin (0.6%, 12 cm2, application duration: 15 min.) or a lidocaine/prilocaine patch (25/25 mg, 10 cm2, application duration: 60 min.) on the right volar forearm. Secondly, 7-14 days later in the same area either at first capsaicin (for 15 min.) and immediately afterwards local anesthetics (for 60 min.) was applied (Cap/LA), or in inversed order with the same application duration (LA/Cap). Before, after each application and 7-14 days later a QST was performed bilaterally.StatisticsWilcoxon-test, ANOVA, p < 0.05.ResultsSingle application of 0,6% capsaicin induced thermal hypoesthesia, cold hypoalgesia, heat hyperalgesia and tactile allodynia. Lidocaine/prilocaine alone induced thermal and tactile hypoesthesia as well as mechanical and cold hypoalgesia, and a heat hyperalgesia (to a smaller extent). Ipsilaterally both co-applications induced a combination of the above mentioned changes. Significant contralateral sensory changes occurred only after the co-application with concomitant sensitization and hypoesthesia and comprised increased cold (Cap/LA, LA/Cap) and mechanical detection as well as cold pain threshold (LA/Cap).ConclusionThe present experimental model using combined application of capsaicin and LA imitates partly the complex sensory changes observed in patients with unilateral neuropathic pain and might be used as an additional surrogate model. Only the concomitant use both agents in the same area induces both positive and negative sensory signs ipsilaterally as well as parallel contralateral sensory changes (to a lesser extent).Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01540877 , registered on 23 February 2012.

Project description:IntroductionDysmenorrhea is associated with increased risk of chronic pain and hyperalgesia. Menstruating individuals with dysmenorrhea are more likely to have elevated pain reactivity when experiencing experimental pain, than those without. However, no study has examined intragroup differences in reactions to experimentally induced pain for individuals with dysmenorrhea. The main aim of this study was to examine the relative roles of dysmenorrhea severity and interference in the experience of experimentally-induced pain.MethodsParticipants were 120 menstruating individuals involved in a larger research study examining the influence of expectations on experimentally-induced pain. As part of the study, participants completed an online questionnaire regarding demographic and menstrual information and participated in a cold pressor task. Participants were randomized into four groups based on the manipulation of two independent variables: (1) high vs. low expectations about pain severity (pain-expectations); (2) and high vs. low expectations about one's pain tolerance (self-expectations). Participants verbally rated their pain severity throughout the cold pressor task using a 0-10 scale. Regression analyses were conducted examining the relationships between dysmenorrhea experience (i.e., average severity and interference) and cold pressor data [pain severity ratings and pain tolerance (i.e., total time in the cold pressor)], controlling for the manipulated expectations and age. Then, moderation analyses were conducted examining expectation group differences.ResultsWhen controlling for manipulated expectations and age, dysmenorrhea severity significantly predicted initial pain severity rating (p = 0.022) but did not predict final pain severity rating (p = 0.263) or pain tolerance (p = 0.120). Dysmenorrhea interference did not predict initial pain severity rating (p = 0.106), final pain severity rating (p = 0.134), or pain tolerance (p = 0.360). A moderation analysis indicated that the relationship between dysmenorrhea severity and initial pain severity rating was not moderated by pain-expectations, χ 2(1) = 0.412, p = 0.521.DiscussionDuring an experimentally-induced pain task, dysmenorrhea severity but not interference predicted initial pain severity rating, such that higher levels of dysmenorrhea severity predicted greater initial pain severity rating. This suggests individuals with more severe dysmenorrhea pain may experience greater initial sensitivity to pain and be at risk for increased sensitivity to acute pain and potentially the development of chronic pain.

Dataset Information

Is all validation equal? Evaluating sensory- and emotion-focused validation in the context of experimentally induced pain.

Publications

Is all validation equal? Evaluating sensory- and emotion-focused validation in the context of experimentally induced pain.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets