Opposite patterns of change in perception of imagined and physically induced pain over the course of repeated thermal stimulations.

BACKGROUND: Individuals frequently show habituation to repeated noxious heat. However, given the defensive function of human pain processing, it is reasonable to assume that individuals anticipate that they would become increasingly sensitive to repeated thermal pain stimuli. No previous studies have, however, been addressed to this assumption. Therefore, in the current study, we investigated how healthy human individuals imagine the intensity of repeated thermal pain stimulations, and compared this with the intensity ratings given after physically induced thermal pain trials. METHODS: Healthy participants (N = 20) gave pain intensity ratings in two conditions: imagined and real thermal pain. In the real pain condition, thermal pain stimuli of two intensities (minimal and moderate pain) were delivered in four consecutive trials. The duration of the peak temperature was 20 s, and stimulation was always delivered to the same location. In each trial, participants rated the pain intensity twice, 5 and 15 s after the onset of the peak temperature. In the imagined pain condition, participants were subjected to a reference pain stimulus and then asked to imagine and rate the same sequence of stimulations as in the induced pain condition. RESULTS: Ratings of imagined pain and physically induced pain followed opposite courses over repeated stimulations: Ratings of imagined pain indicated sensitization, whereas ratings for physically induced pain indicated habituation. The findings were similar for minimal and moderate pain intensities. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that, rather than habituating to pain, healthy individuals imagine that they would become increasingly sensitive to repeated thermal pain stimuli. SIGNIFICANCE: This study identified opposite patterns of change in perception of imagined pain (sensitization) and physically induced pain (habituation). The findings show that individuals anticipate that they would become increasingly sensitive to repeated pain stimuli, which might also have clinical implications.

The rubber hand illusion increases heat pain threshold.

BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence shows that manipulations of cortical body representation, for example, by simply viewing one's own body, can relieve pain in healthy subjects. Despite the widespread use of the rubber hand illusion (RHI) as an effective experimental tool for the manipulation of bodily awareness, previous studies examining the analgesic effect of the RHI have produced conflicting results. METHOD: We used noxious heat stimuli to induce finger pain in 29 healthy subjects, and we recorded the participants' pain thresholds and subjective pain ratings during the RHI and during the control conditions. Two control conditions were included in our experiment - a standard one with reduced illusion strength (asynchronous stroking control) and an additional one in which the participants viewed their own hand. RESULTS: Raw data showed that both the RHI and the vision of the own hand resulted in slightly higher pain thresholds than the asynchronous stroking control (illusion: 47.79 °C; own-hand: 47.99 °C; asynchronous: 47.52 °C). After logarithmic transformation to achieve normality, paired t-tests revealed that both increases in pain threshold were significant (illusion/asynchronous: p = 0.036; own-hand/asynchronous: p = 0.007). In contrast, there was no significant difference in pain threshold between the illusion and the own-hand conditions (p = 0.656). Pain rating scores were not log-normal, and Wilcoxon singed-rank tests found no significant differences in pain ratings between the study conditions. CONCLUSION: The RHI increases heat pain threshold and the analgesic effect of the RHI is comparable with that of seeing one's own hand. The latter finding may have clinical implications.