Does EEG activity during painful stimulation mirror more closely the noxious stimulus intensity or the subjective pain sensation?

BACKGROUND: Many researchers have tried to investigate pain by studying brain responses. One method used to investigate pain-related brain responses is continuous electroencephalography (EEG). The objective of the current study is to add on to our understanding of EEG responses during pain, by differentiation between EEG patterns indicative of (i) the noxious stimulus intensity and (ii) the subjective pain sensation. METHODS: EEG was recorded during the administration of tonic experimental pain, consisting of six minutes of contact heat applied to the leg via a thermode. Two stimuli above pain threshold, one at pain threshold and two non-painful stimuli were administered. Thirty-six healthy participants provided a subjective pain rating during thermal stimulation. Relative EEG power was calculated for the frequency bands alpha1, alpha2, beta1, beta2, delta, and theta. RESULTS: Whereas EEG activity could not be predicted by stimulus intensity (except in one frequency band), subjective pain sensation could significantly predict differences in EEG activity in several frequency bands. An increase in the subjective pain sensation was associated with a decrease in alpha2, beta1, beta2 as well as in theta activity across the midline electrodes. CONCLUSION: The subjective experience of pain seems to capture unique variance in EEG activity above and beyond what is captured by noxious stimulus intensity.

Conditioned Pain Modulation (CPM) Effects Captured in Facial Expressions.

PURPOSE: Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is most often assessed using self-report of pain. However, self-report of pain is not always available (eg in individuals with cognitive impairment) and is susceptible to report bias. In comparison, the facial expression of pain is more reflex-like and represents one of the most sensitive and specific non-verbal signals of pain. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the facial expression of pain is sensitive enough to capture endogenous pain inhibition as elicited during CPM paradigms. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 26 female participants took part in this study. Facial and verbal responses to phasic heat pain were assessed once while participants immersed their hand in a hot water bath and once without additional stimulation. Facial responses were analyzed using the Facial Action Coding System (FACS). Verbal responses were assessed using a Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). RESULTS: Pain-relevant facial responses as well as pain ratings to phasic heat pain were significantly reduced when participants simultaneously immersed their hand in a hot water bath compared to baseline. Thus, CPM effects could be demonstrated both on subjective as well as on facial responses. Moreover, CPM-induced changes in pain-relevant facial responses and in NRS ratings were significantly correlated. CONCLUSION: The present study shows that facial expressions of pain are sensitive enough to capture CPM effects. Given the proven clinical usefulness of assessing CPM, the parallel assessment of verbal and facial CPM effects might be a promising approach with wider scope of applications. Further research in other demographic healthy participant and clinical cohorts is warranted.