Pain, AcuteNCT04280796
Changes in Affective Pain Processing in Human Volunteers
A study testing psychophysical tasks and cognitive task in people with Pain, Acute and Pain, Chronic, run by susanne becker at 1 site in Switzerland.
Trial summary
The experience of pain is more than the conscious perception of nociceptive signals. Emotional and motivational aspects accompany pain, leading to its aversiveness and motivation for avoidance. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 60 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Pain, Acute, Pain, Chronic, Low Back Pain
- What is being tested?
- psychophysical tasks and cognitive task
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 183 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSwitzerland
- Study dates
- 21 Sep 2020to 1 Nov 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 60 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- good overall health status
- sufficient knowledge of German or English to follow instructions
- ability to give written informed consent
- unspecific musculoskeletal chronic pain
- sufficient knowledge of German or English to follow instructions
- ability to give written informed consent
Who cannot join
- pain longer than >3 consecutive days and on more than 30 days within the last 12 months
- major psychiatric or neurological disorders, and substance abuse
- consumption of alcohol, illegal drugs, and analgesic drug within 24 hours before testing
- For chronic pain patients
- major psychiatric or neurological disorders, excluding depression and anxiety, and substance abuse
- consumption of alcohol, illegal drugs, and analgesic drugs within 24 hours before testing
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Mechanisms of Emotional-motivational Pain Processing in Health and Disease
The experience of pain is more than the conscious perception of nociceptive signals. Emotional and motivational aspects accompany pain, leading to its aversiveness and motivation for avoidance. In chronic pain, a negative hedonic shift has been proposed that is characterized by disproportionally increased emotional-motivational compared to sensory-discriminative pain responses. Such a negative hedonic shift is, for example, mirrored in very high comorbidity rates of chronic pain and affective disorders such as depression and anxiety. The aim of this study is to develop methods that allow the differentiation of sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain response and to characterize mechanisms of the negative hedonic shift.
Read the detailed description
The experience of pain is more than the conscious perception of nociceptive signals. Emotional and motivational aspects accompany pain, leading to its aversiveness and motivation for avoidance. In chronic pain, a negative hedonic shift has been proposed that is characterized by disproportionally increased emotional-motivational compared to sensory-discriminative pain responses. Such a negative hedonic shift is, for example, mirrored in very high comorbidity rates of chronic pain and affective disorders such as depression and anxiety. However, appropriate psychophysical methods to differentiate sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain processing in humans are lacking. Therefore, only indirect evidence on the assumed negative hedonic shift in chronic pain is available, albeit understanding the mechanisms of such a shift would increase our knowledge on the development and maintenance of chronic pain in important ways with impact beyond pain research. The aim of this study is to develop methods that allow the differentiation of sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain response and to characterize mechanisms of the negative hedonic shift.
A potential benefit of the study will be an increase in the knowledge on mechanisms of the development and maintenance of chronic pain with a focus on emotional-motivational processes likely also relevant in other diseases such as affective disorders.
This study involves only minimal risks for participants. The methods that will be used in the experimental investigations are within the range of standard procedures in pain research and experimental psychology and are frequently used in healthy participants and patients. Experimental pain stimulation will be adjusted to individual pain sensitivity, rendering the applied stimulation tolerable.
Substudy 1 Each participant will perform one testing session of approximately 1.5h duration at the Balgrist Campus, Balgrist University Hospital, Zurich. Healthy volunteers (N=31) will be recruited. The testing session will comprise a discrimination task and an avoidance task to assess sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain components independently of each other. The tasks will be performed in counterbalanced order. After obtaining written informed consent, participants' individual heat pain threshold and tolerance will be determined, based on which the stimulation intensity to be used in the discrimination and the avoidance task will be calculated. After this assessment, participants either perform the discrimination or the avoidance task. Within the discrimination task, participants have to indicate whether they perceived a small increase in temperature or not. In the avoidance task, participants can avoid a painful stimulation by reacting fast enough to a visual cue. Participants will be randomly (balanced randomization) assigned to one of two learning conditions, either reinforcing successful discrimination or avoidance, to increase sensory-discriminative or emotional-motivational pain responses. Reinforcement, implemented by small monetary wins, will start depending on the condition after half the trials of the discrimination or the avoidance task. Subjective ratings of perceived pain intensity and unpleasantness will be assessed within both tasks as control variables to test whether increases in sensory-discriminative or emotional-motivational pain processing generalize to the subjective response channel. At the end of the testing session, participants will complete several questionnaires to investigate whether certain personality traits are related to learning capacity as tested in these tasks.
Substudy 2 Each participant will perform one testing session of approximately 1.5h duration at the Balgrist Campus, Balgrist University Hospital, Zurich. The sample will consist of patients with unspecific musculoskeletal chronic pain (N=31) and age- and sex-matched healthy controls (N=31). As in Substudy 1, the testing session will comprise the discrimination task and the avoidance task to assess sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain components independently of each other. The tasks will be performed in counterbalanced order. After obtaining written informed consent, participants' individual heat pain threshold and tolerance will be determined, based on which the stimulation intensity to be used in the discrimination and the avoidance task will be calculated. After this assessment, participants either perform the discrimination or the avoidance task as in Substudy 1. In contrast to Substudy 1, reinforcement in the avoidance task will be implemented to decrease emotional-motivational pain responses because it is assumed that patients show already increased emotional-motivational compared to sensory-discriminative pain processing. Subjective ratings of perceived pain intensity and unpleasantness will be assessed within both tasks as control variables to test whether increases in sensory-discriminative or emotional-motivational pain processing generalize to the subjective response channel. At the end of the testing session, participants will complete several questionnaires, to investigate whether certain personality traits are related to heightened emotional-motivational pain processing.
Sample sizes for Substudy 1 and 2 are based on a priori sample size calculations using G*Power 3.1 with a desired medium effect size f=0.25, alpha=0.05, beta=0.80, repeated measures ANOVA between-within-subject designs, and an attrition rate of 10%. Outcome variables () will be analyzed in separate mixed model analyses for ANOVA designs with appropriate within- and between-subject factors. Associations of primary endpoints () with personality traits (secondary outcomes) will be analyzed using Person- or Spearman correlation coeffients, where appropriate. Significance levels will be set to 5%, adjusted with false discovery rate for multiple testing. Effect sizes will be calculated in terms of generalized η2 and Cohen's d.
Substudy 3 Each participant will perform one testing session of approximately 1.25h duration at the Balgrist Campus, Balgrist University Hospital, Zurich. Healthy volunteers (N=30) will be recruited. During testing session participants will perform a psychophysical task to assess metacognition in pain perception as an indicator of the cognitive-evaluative pain component. The objective is to assess whether metacognition on pain perception are involved and subjective ratings of perceived pain and how metacognition relates to pain intensity. After obtaining written informed consent, participants' individual heat pain threshold and tolerance will be determined, based on which the stimulation intensity to be used in the experiment will be calculated. After this assessment, participants perform the cognitive pain task. Within this task, participants have to indicate whether they perceived a first or second heat pain stimulus as higher in intensity, whether the higher one was perceived as painful or not, and their confidence in both these answers. In addition, participants will complete several questionnaires to investigate whether certain personality traits and personal states are related to metacognition in pain.
The sample size of Substudy 3 is determined according to Kreft and Leeuw (2007) after which a great enough power will be reached with a sample size of 30 participants and 30 observations to identify cross-level interactions. Substudy 3 follows a within subject design with repeated measures. The tasks that will be performed by each participant include the within-subject factor 'temperature difference' (differences in temperature between first and second stimulus) and the within-subject factor 'temperature level' (temperature relative to individual pain threshold of each stimulus). The order of the different conditions in each task will be applied using a balanced pseudo-randomized order. For testing hypothesis 1ai, 1bi and 1c t-test will be conducted. For Hypothesis 1aii and 1bii chi square tests are planned. To test hypothesis 2a, 2c and 3 logistic hierarchic liner models and for hypothesis 2b and 2d hierarchic linear models will be performed.
Within this study methods that allow the separation of different components of the perception of pain will be developed and validated and which are currently not available. In addition, based on theses methods, a human model on how such components of pain can dissociate will be developed, thereby allowing investigating a prominent assumption on factors that crucially contribute to the development and maintenance of chronic pain. The expected results will form the basis for the development of novel mechanism-based pain therapies.
Psychophysical methods based on experimental psychology and pain research will be used, which have been shown before to be successful in investigating different aspects of pain perception and the modulation of pain perception. The methods used are in the standard range of methods from human pain research and experimental psychology and hold only minimal risk for participants (see above "Risk / Benefit Assessment").
- Conditions
- Pain, Acute, Pain, Chronic, Low Back Pain
- Being tested
- psychophysical tasks, cognitive task
- Keywords
- acute pain, chronic pain, low back pain, hedonic shift, emotional-motivation components of pain, sensory-discriminative components of pain, operant conditioning, metacognition
- Medical subject headings
- Acute Pain, Chronic Pain, Low Back Pain
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
psychophysical tasksBehavioural
All participants perform two psychophysical tasks to assess sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses independently from each other.
In addition, in Substudy 1 an operant learning paradigm will be implement to dissociate these responses, increasing the sensory-discriminative pain responses compared to emotional-motivational pain responses by contingent monetary reinforcement or vice versa.
In Substudy 2, responses of chronic pain patients will be compared to those of healthy participants to characterize possible alterations and operant learning will be operationalized to decrease emotional-motivational pain responses, which are assumed to be already increased in the patients.
cognitive taskBehavioural
In Substudy 3 participants will perform a psychophysical task to assess metacognition in pain perception as an indicator of the cognitive-evaluative pain component.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Substudy 1 | Experimental | All participants will perform two psychophysical tasks to assess sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses independently from each other. No arms will perform. In addition, in Substudy 1 an operant learning paradigm will be implemented to dissociate these responses, increasing the sensory-discriminative pain responses compared to emotional-motivational pain responses by contingent monetary reinforcement and vice versa.
Primary objectives:
1. To develop psychophysical methods that allow the independent assessment of sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses and
2. to show that emotional-motivational and sensory-discriminative pain components can be dissociated
Secondary objective:
To assess whether fear of pain, fear-avoidance beliefs, pain catastrophizing, and sensation seeking as personality traits can explain variations in how strongly sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses can be dissociated Receives: Behavioral: psychophysical tasks |
| Substudy 2 | Experimental | All participants will perform two psychophysical tasks to assess sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses independently from each other. No arms will perform. In addition, in Substudy 2, responses of chronic pain patients will be compared to those of healthy participants to characterize possible alterations in the patients and operant learning will be operationalized to decrease emotional-motivational pain responses, which are assumed to be already increased in the patients.
Primary objective:
To demonstrate that in chronic pain patients, emotional-motivational pain responses are increased relative to sensory-discriminative pain responses
Secondary objective:
To assess whether fear of pain, fear-avoidance beliefs, pain catastrophizing, and sensation seeking as personality traits can explain variations in the present dissociation of sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses in chronic pain patients Receives: Behavioral: psychophysical tasks |
| Substudy 3 | Experimental | All participants will perform a psychophysical task to assess metacognition in pain perception as an indicator of the cognitive-evaluative pain component. No arms will perform.
Primary objective:
To assess whether metacognition on pain perception are involved and subjective ratings of perceived pain and how metacognition relates to pain intensity.
Secondary objective:
To assess whether confidentiality as a personality trait , pain catastrophizing, and skin conductance responses are related to metacognition in pain. Receives: Behavioral: cognitive task |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
ratio of sensory to emotional pain responses
Ratio of the number of correct responses (%) in a task assessing sensory-discriminative pain responses to number of correct responses (%) in a task assessing emotional-motivational pain responses.
Measured: during the procedure
Secondary outcomes (11)
reaction time (RT)
reaction times
Measured: during the procedure
pain threshold
Individual pain threshold assessed with experimental heat pain
Measured: baseline
pain tolerance
Individual pain tolerance assessed with experimental heat pain
Measured: baseline
perceived pain intensity
Individual perceived pain intensity assessed with experimental heat pain
Measured: during the procedure
perceived pain unpleasantness
Individual perceived pain unpleasantness assessed with experimental heat pain
Measured: during the procedure
Fear of Pain Questionnaire (FPQ-III)
FPQ-III is one questionnaire which is a widely used to assess the fear of pain (FOP) in clinical and non clinical samples. It is one self-report instrument that was developed specifically to assess fear of different stimuli usually causing pain.
Time duration <5minutes Five point Likert scale Score range (30-150) A higher score indicates higher fear of pain, no cut-off values
Measured: during the procedure at day one
Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)
The PCS was developed in 1995 at the University Centre for Research on Pain and Disability in order to facilitate research on the mechanisms by which catastrophizing impacts on pain experience. Catastrophizing is currently defined as: an exaggerated negative mental set brought to bear during actual or anticipated painful experience.
Time duration less than 5minutes Five point Likert scale Score range (0-52) <20 low risk for development of chronicity 20-30 moderate risk for development of chronicity >30 high risk for development of chronicity
Measured: during the procedure at day one
Fear of Avoidance Beliefs FABQ
FABQ focuses on how a patient's fear avoidance beliefs about physical activity and work may affect and contribute to their low back pain and resulting disability
Time duration 5-10minutes Seven point Likert scale Score range (0-96) Higher score indicates fear avoidance behaviors
Measured: during the procedure at day one
Personal Evaluation Inventory (PEI)
PEI asses among other things ones trait confidence which might be related to metacognition in pain.
Measured: during procedure
skin conductance responses
individual skin conductance reaction on heat stimuli during the behavioural task
Measured: during procedure
confidence ratings on forced choice questions
Answers on forced-choice questions on which one of two heat stimuli was more intense and whether this one was perceived as painful, ratings of confidence. The answers on the forces-choice questions together with their ratings of confindence in these answers provide a measurement of metacognition.
Measured: during procedure
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Feb 2020
- Study start21 Sep 2020
- Primary completion1 Nov 2023
- Study completion1 Nov 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Pain, AcuteStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Model description
- Study comprises an intervention that is neither a therapeutic or transplant product nor a transplant. Study involves minimal risks for participants. Used methods are within the range of standard methods frequently used in pain research. All participants will perform 2 psychophysical tasks to assess sensory-discriminative \& emotional-motivational pain responses independently from each other. Substudy1: An operant learning paradigm will be implemented to dissociate these responses, increasing the sensory-discriminative compared to emotional-motivational pain responses by contingent monetary reinforcement \& vice versa. Substudy2: Responses of chronic pain patients will be compared to those of healthy participants to characterize possible alterations. Operant learning will be operationalized to decrease emotional-motivational pain responses, which are assumed to be increased in patients. Substudy3: Participants will perform a psychophysical task to assess metacognition in pain perception.
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 183 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- susanne becker
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Swiss National Science Foundation
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, susanne becker, Balgrist University Hospital
- Investigators
- Susanne Becker, PD Dr., Principal investigator, Balgrist Universitätsklinik
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04280796
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PR00P1_179697/1
- Status last verified
- Nov 2023
- First submitted
- 15 Jan 2020
- Last updated
- 21 Nov 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Nov 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Mechanisms of Emotional-motivational Pain Processing in Health and Disease
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04280796
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PR00P1_179697/1
- Conditions
- Pain, Acute, Pain, Chronic, Low Back Pain
- Keywords
- acute pain, chronic pain, low back pain, hedonic shift, emotional-motivation components of pain, sensory-discriminative components of pain, operant conditioning, metacognition
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 183 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- susanne beckerUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Swiss National Science Foundation
- Study start
- 21 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Nov 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 1 Nov 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 21 Feb 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The experience of pain is more than the conscious perception of nociceptive signals. Emotional and motivational aspects accompany pain, leading to its aversiveness and motivation for avoidance. In chronic pain, a negative hedonic shift has been proposed that is characterized by disproportionally increased emotional-motivational compared to sensory-discriminative pain responses. Such a negative hedonic shift is, for example, mirrored in very high comorbidity rates of chronic pain and affective disorders such as depression and anxiety. The aim of this study is to develop methods that allow the differentiation of sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain response and to characterize mechanisms of the negative hedonic shift.
Detailed description
The experience of pain is more than the conscious perception of nociceptive signals. Emotional and motivational aspects accompany pain, leading to its aversiveness and motivation for avoidance. In chronic pain, a negative hedonic shift has been proposed that is characterized by disproportionally increased emotional-motivational compared to sensory-discriminative pain responses. Such a negative hedonic shift is, for example, mirrored in very high comorbidity rates of chronic pain and affective disorders such as depression and anxiety. However, appropriate psychophysical methods to differentiate sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain processing in humans are lacking. Therefore, only indirect evidence on the assumed negative hedonic shift in chronic pain is available, albeit understanding the mechanisms of such a shift would increase our knowledge on the development and maintenance of chronic pain in important ways with impact beyond pain research. The aim of this study is to develop methods that allow the differentiation of sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain response and to characterize mechanisms of the negative hedonic shift.
A potential benefit of the study will be an increase in the knowledge on mechanisms of the development and maintenance of chronic pain with a focus on emotional-motivational processes likely also relevant in other diseases such as affective disorders.
This study involves only minimal risks for participants. The methods that will be used in the experimental investigations are within the range of standard procedures in pain research and experimental psychology and are frequently used in healthy participants and patients. Experimental pain stimulation will be adjusted to individual pain sensitivity, rendering the applied stimulation tolerable.
Substudy 1 Each participant will perform one testing session of approximately 1.5h duration at the Balgrist Campus, Balgrist University Hospital, Zurich. Healthy volunteers (N=31) will be recruited. The testing session will comprise a discrimination task and an avoidance task to assess sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain components independently of each other. The tasks will be performed in counterbalanced order. After obtaining written informed consent, participants' individual heat pain threshold and tolerance will be determined, based on which the stimulation intensity to be used in the discrimination and the avoidance task will be calculated. After this assessment, participants either perform the discrimination or the avoidance task. Within the discrimination task, participants have to indicate whether they perceived a small increase in temperature or not. In the avoidance task, participants can avoid a painful stimulation by reacting fast enough to a visual cue. Participants will be randomly (balanced randomization) assigned to one of two learning conditions, either reinforcing successful discrimination or avoidance, to increase sensory-discriminative or emotional-motivational pain responses. Reinforcement, implemented by small monetary wins, will start depending on the condition after half the trials of the discrimination or the avoidance task. Subjective ratings of perceived pain intensity and unpleasantness will be assessed within both tasks as control variables to test whether increases in sensory-discriminative or emotional-motivational pain processing generalize to the subjective response channel. At the end of the testing session, participants will complete several questionnaires to investigate whether certain personality traits are related to learning capacity as tested in these tasks.
Substudy 2 Each participant will perform one testing session of approximately 1.5h duration at the Balgrist Campus, Balgrist University Hospital, Zurich. The sample will consist of patients with unspecific musculoskeletal chronic pain (N=31) and age- and sex-matched healthy controls (N=31). As in Substudy 1, the testing session will comprise the discrimination task and the avoidance task to assess sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain components independently of each other. The tasks will be performed in counterbalanced order. After obtaining written informed consent, participants' individual heat pain threshold and tolerance will be determined, based on which the stimulation intensity to be used in the discrimination and the avoidance task will be calculated. After this assessment, participants either perform the discrimination or the avoidance task as in Substudy 1. In contrast to Substudy 1, reinforcement in the avoidance task will be implemented to decrease emotional-motivational pain responses because it is assumed that patients show already increased emotional-motivational compared to sensory-discriminative pain processing. Subjective ratings of perceived pain intensity and unpleasantness will be assessed within both tasks as control variables to test whether increases in sensory-discriminative or emotional-motivational pain processing generalize to the subjective response channel. At the end of the testing session, participants will complete several questionnaires, to investigate whether certain personality traits are related to heightened emotional-motivational pain processing.
Sample sizes for Substudy 1 and 2 are based on a priori sample size calculations using G*Power 3.1 with a desired medium effect size f=0.25, alpha=0.05, beta=0.80, repeated measures ANOVA between-within-subject designs, and an attrition rate of 10%. Outcome variables () will be analyzed in separate mixed model analyses for ANOVA designs with appropriate within- and between-subject factors. Associations of primary endpoints () with personality traits (secondary outcomes) will be analyzed using Person- or Spearman correlation coeffients, where appropriate. Significance levels will be set to 5%, adjusted with false discovery rate for multiple testing. Effect sizes will be calculated in terms of generalized η2 and Cohen's d.
Substudy 3 Each participant will perform one testing session of approximately 1.25h duration at the Balgrist Campus, Balgrist University Hospital, Zurich. Healthy volunteers (N=30) will be recruited. During testing session participants will perform a psychophysical task to assess metacognition in pain perception as an indicator of the cognitive-evaluative pain component. The objective is to assess whether metacognition on pain perception are involved and subjective ratings of perceived pain and how metacognition relates to pain intensity. After obtaining written informed consent, participants' individual heat pain threshold and tolerance will be determined, based on which the stimulation intensity to be used in the experiment will be calculated. After this assessment, participants perform the cognitive pain task. Within this task, participants have to indicate whether they perceived a first or second heat pain stimulus as higher in intensity, whether the higher one was perceived as painful or not, and their confidence in both these answers. In addition, participants will complete several questionnaires to investigate whether certain personality traits and personal states are related to metacognition in pain.
The sample size of Substudy 3 is determined according to Kreft and Leeuw (2007) after which a great enough power will be reached with a sample size of 30 participants and 30 observations to identify cross-level interactions. Substudy 3 follows a within subject design with repeated measures. The tasks that will be performed by each participant include the within-subject factor 'temperature difference' (differences in temperature between first and second stimulus) and the within-subject factor 'temperature level' (temperature relative to individual pain threshold of each stimulus). The order of the different conditions in each task will be applied using a balanced pseudo-randomized order. For testing hypothesis 1ai, 1bi and 1c t-test will be conducted. For Hypothesis 1aii and 1bii chi square tests are planned. To test hypothesis 2a, 2c and 3 logistic hierarchic liner models and for hypothesis 2b and 2d hierarchic linear models will be performed.
Within this study methods that allow the separation of different components of the perception of pain will be developed and validated and which are currently not available. In addition, based on theses methods, a human model on how such components of pain can dissociate will be developed, thereby allowing investigating a prominent assumption on factors that crucially contribute to the development and maintenance of chronic pain. The expected results will form the basis for the development of novel mechanism-based pain therapies.
Psychophysical methods based on experimental psychology and pain research will be used, which have been shown before to be successful in investigating different aspects of pain perception and the modulation of pain perception. The methods used are in the standard range of methods from human pain research and experimental psychology and hold only minimal risk for participants (see above "Risk / Benefit Assessment").
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Basic science
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 3
- Model description
- Study comprises an intervention that is neither a therapeutic or transplant product nor a transplant. Study involves minimal risks for participants. Used methods are within the range of standard methods frequently used in pain research. All participants will perform 2 psychophysical tasks to assess sensory-discriminative \& emotional-motivational pain responses independently from each other. Substudy1: An operant learning paradigm will be implemented to dissociate these responses, increasing the sensory-discriminative compared to emotional-motivational pain responses by contingent monetary reinforcement \& vice versa. Substudy2: Responses of chronic pain patients will be compared to those of healthy participants to characterize possible alterations. Operant learning will be operationalized to decrease emotional-motivational pain responses, which are assumed to be increased in patients. Substudy3: Participants will perform a psychophysical task to assess metacognition in pain perception.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Substudy 1 | Experimental | Behavioral: psychophysical tasksAll participants will perform two psychophysical tasks to assess sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses independently from each other. No arms will perform. In addition, in Substudy 1 an operant learning paradigm will be implemented to dissociate these responses, increasing the sensory-discriminative pain responses compared to emotional-motivational pain responses by contingent monetary reinforcement and vice versa. Primary objectives: 1. To develop psychophysical methods that allow the independent assessment of sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses and 2. to show that emotional-motivational and sensory-discriminative pain components can be dissociated Secondary objective: To assess whether fear of pain, fear-avoidance beliefs, pain catastrophizing, and sensation seeking as personality traits can explain variations in how strongly sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses can be dissociated |
| Substudy 2 | Experimental | Behavioral: psychophysical tasksAll participants will perform two psychophysical tasks to assess sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses independently from each other. No arms will perform. In addition, in Substudy 2, responses of chronic pain patients will be compared to those of healthy participants to characterize possible alterations in the patients and operant learning will be operationalized to decrease emotional-motivational pain responses, which are assumed to be already increased in the patients. Primary objective: To demonstrate that in chronic pain patients, emotional-motivational pain responses are increased relative to sensory-discriminative pain responses Secondary objective: To assess whether fear of pain, fear-avoidance beliefs, pain catastrophizing, and sensation seeking as personality traits can explain variations in the present dissociation of sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses in chronic pain patients |
| Substudy 3 | Experimental | Behavioral: cognitive taskAll participants will perform a psychophysical task to assess metacognition in pain perception as an indicator of the cognitive-evaluative pain component. No arms will perform. Primary objective: To assess whether metacognition on pain perception are involved and subjective ratings of perceived pain and how metacognition relates to pain intensity. Secondary objective: To assess whether confidentiality as a personality trait , pain catastrophizing, and skin conductance responses are related to metacognition in pain. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 60 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- good overall health status
- sufficient knowledge of German or English to follow instructions
- ability to give written informed consent
- unspecific musculoskeletal chronic pain
- sufficient knowledge of German or English to follow instructions
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- pain longer than >3 consecutive days and on more than 30 days within the last 12 months
- major psychiatric or neurological disorders, and substance abuse
- consumption of alcohol, illegal drugs, and analgesic drug within 24 hours before testing
- For chronic pain patients
- major psychiatric or neurological disorders, excluding depression and anxiety, and substance abuse
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| psychophysical tasksAll participants perform two psychophysical tasks to assess sensory-discriminative and emotional-motivational pain responses independently from each other. In addition, in Substudy 1 an operant learning paradigm will be implement to dissociate these responses, increasing the sensory-discriminative pain responses compared to emotional-motivational pain responses by contingent monetary reinforcement or vice versa. In Substudy 2, responses of chronic pain patients will be compared to those of healthy participants to characterize possible alterations and operant learning will be operationalized to decrease emotional-motivational pain responses, which are assumed to be already increased in the patients. | Behavioural | Substudy 1, Substudy 2 |
| cognitive taskIn Substudy 3 participants will perform a psychophysical task to assess metacognition in pain perception as an indicator of the cognitive-evaluative pain component. | Behavioural | Substudy 3 |
Primary outcome
ratio of sensory to emotional pain responses
Time frame: during the procedure
Ratio of the number of correct responses (%) in a task assessing sensory-discriminative pain responses to number of correct responses (%) in a task assessing emotional-motivational pain responses.
11 secondary outcomes
reaction time (RT)
Time frame: during the procedure
pain threshold
Time frame: baseline
pain tolerance
Time frame: baseline
perceived pain intensity
Time frame: during the procedure
perceived pain unpleasantness
Time frame: during the procedure
Fear of Pain Questionnaire (FPQ-III)
Time frame: during the procedure at day one
Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)
Time frame: during the procedure at day one
Fear of Avoidance Beliefs FABQ
Time frame: during the procedure at day one
Personal Evaluation Inventory (PEI)
Time frame: during procedure
skin conductance responses
Time frame: during procedure
confidence ratings on forced choice questions
Time frame: during procedure
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 21 Nov 2023.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Pain, Acute
Not yet recruiting
ACUTE EFFECTS OF HIGH-INTENSITY LASER THERAPY ON PAIN, MUSCLE STIFFNESS, AND GRIP STRENGTH IN HEALTHY ADULTS
Exercise-Induced Muscle Fatigue, Fatigue Recovery
Not yet recruiting
Two Bupivacaine Concentrations for Recto-Intercostal Fascial Plane Block After Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
Postoperative Pain, Acute Pain
Not yet recruiting
Human Experimental Models of Pain (HEMP)
Acute Pain
RecruitingPhase 4
Assessment of the Value of FAPI and FDG-PET-CT in Diagnosis of Acute Phase Peyronie's Disease
Peyronie's Disease
RecruitingPhase 1/2
A Study of CYT-1010 in Healthy Volunteers and Participants With Acute Pain After Third Molar Extraction
Acute Postoperative Pain, Dental Pain
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Susanne Becker, PD Dr. principal investigator
Balgrist Universitätsklinik
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing psychophysical tasks and cognitive task in people with Pain, Acute and Pain, Chronic, run by susanne becker at 1 site in Switzerland.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 21 Nov 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Switzerland. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
ratio of sensory to emotional pain responses (time frame: during the procedure). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 21 Nov 2023.