Spatial summation of pain is associated with pain expectations: Results from a home-based paradigm.

The purpose of this study was to reproduce the previously observed spatial summation of pain effect (SSp) using non-laboratory procedures and commercial equipment. An additional aim was to explore the association between expectations and SSp. The Cold Pressor Task (CPT) was used to induce SSp. Healthy participants (N = 68) immersed their non-dominant hands (divided into 5 segments) into cold water (CPT). Two conditions were used 1) gradual hand immersion (ascending condition) and 2) gradual hand withdrawal (descending condition). Pain intensity was measured on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). Psychological factors, such as the participants' expectations of pain intensity were also measured on a VAS. Results showed significant SSp (χ2(4) = 116.90, p < 0.001), reproduced with non-laboratory equipment in a home-based set-up. Furthermore, two novel findings were observed: i) there was a significant correlation between expectations and perceived pain, indicating a link between pain expectations and SSp, ii) spatial summation increased with the increase in duration exposure to the noxious stimulus (Wald χ2(8) = 80.80, p < 0.001). This study suggests that SSp is associated with pain expectations and can be formed by a mixture of excitatory and inhibitory mechanisms potentially driven by temporal characteristics of neural excitation. Moreover, this study proposes a new feasible way to induce SSp using a home-based set-up.

To Calibrate or not to Calibrate? A Methodological Dilemma in Experimental Pain Research.

To calibrate or not to calibrate? This question is raised by almost everyone designing an experimental pain study with supra-threshold stimulation. The dilemma is whether to individualize stimulus intensity to the pain threshold / supra-threshold pain level of each participant or whether to provide the noxious stimulus at a fixed intensity so that everyone receives the identical input. Each approach has unique pros and cons which need to be considered to i) accurately design an experiment, ii) enhance statistical inference in the given data and, iii) reduce bias and the influence of confounding factors in the individual study e.g., body composition, differences in energy absorption and previous experience. Individualization requires calibration, a procedure already irritating the nociceptive system but allowing to match the pain level across individuals. It leads to a higher variability of the stimulus intensity, thereby influencing the encoding of "noxiousness" by the central nervous system. Results might be less influenced by statistical phenomena such as ceiling/floor effects and the approach does not seem to rise ethical concerns. On the other hand, applying a fixed (standardized) intensity reduces the problem of intensity encoding leading to a large between-subjects variability in pain responses. Fixed stimulation intensities do not require pre-exposure. It can be proposed that one method is not preferable over another, however the choice depends on the study aim and the desired level of external validity. This paper discusses considerations for choosing the optimal approach for experimental pain studies and provides recommendations for different study designs. PERSPECTIVE: To calibrate pain or not? This dilemma is related to almost every experimental pain research. The decision is a trade-off between statistical power and greater control of stimulus encoding. The article decomposes both approaches and presents the pros and cons of either approach supported by data and simulation experiment.