Cargando…

Bedside Testing for Chronic Pelvic Pain: Discriminating Visceral from Somatic Pain

Objectives. This study was done to evaluate three bedside tests in discriminating visceral pain from somatic pain among women with chronic pelvic pain. Study Design. The study was an exploratory cross-sectional evaluation of 81 women with chronic pelvic pain of 6 or more months' duration. Tests...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jarrell, John, Giamberardino, Maria Adele, Robert, Magali, Nasr-Esfahani, Maryam
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3216293/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22135736
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/692102
_version_ 1782216486279970816
author Jarrell, John
Giamberardino, Maria Adele
Robert, Magali
Nasr-Esfahani, Maryam
author_facet Jarrell, John
Giamberardino, Maria Adele
Robert, Magali
Nasr-Esfahani, Maryam
author_sort Jarrell, John
collection PubMed
description Objectives. This study was done to evaluate three bedside tests in discriminating visceral pain from somatic pain among women with chronic pelvic pain. Study Design. The study was an exploratory cross-sectional evaluation of 81 women with chronic pelvic pain of 6 or more months' duration. Tests included abdominal cutaneous allodynia (aCA), perineal cutaneous allodynia (pCA), abdominal and perineal myofascial trigger points (aMFTP) and (pMFTP), and reduced pain thresholds (RPTs). Results. Eighty-one women were recruited, and all women provided informed consent. There were 62 women with apparent visceral pain and 19 with apparent somatic sources of pain. The positive predictive values for pelvic visceral disease were aCA-93%, pCA-91%, aMFTP-93%, pMFTP-81%, and RPT-79%. The likelihood ratio (+) and 95% C.I. for the detection of visceral sources of pain were aCA-4.19 (1.46, 12.0), pCA-2.91 (1.19, 7.11), aMTRP-4.19 (1.46, 12.0), pMFTP-1.35 (0.86, 2.13), and RPT-1.14 (0.85, 1.52), respectively. Conclusions. Tests of cutaneous allodynia, myofascial trigger points, and reduced pain thresholds are easily applied and well tolerated. The tests for cutaneous allodynia appear to have the greatest likelihood of identifying a visceral source of pain compared to somatic sources of pain.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3216293
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32162932011-12-01 Bedside Testing for Chronic Pelvic Pain: Discriminating Visceral from Somatic Pain Jarrell, John Giamberardino, Maria Adele Robert, Magali Nasr-Esfahani, Maryam Pain Res Treat Clinical Study Objectives. This study was done to evaluate three bedside tests in discriminating visceral pain from somatic pain among women with chronic pelvic pain. Study Design. The study was an exploratory cross-sectional evaluation of 81 women with chronic pelvic pain of 6 or more months' duration. Tests included abdominal cutaneous allodynia (aCA), perineal cutaneous allodynia (pCA), abdominal and perineal myofascial trigger points (aMFTP) and (pMFTP), and reduced pain thresholds (RPTs). Results. Eighty-one women were recruited, and all women provided informed consent. There were 62 women with apparent visceral pain and 19 with apparent somatic sources of pain. The positive predictive values for pelvic visceral disease were aCA-93%, pCA-91%, aMFTP-93%, pMFTP-81%, and RPT-79%. The likelihood ratio (+) and 95% C.I. for the detection of visceral sources of pain were aCA-4.19 (1.46, 12.0), pCA-2.91 (1.19, 7.11), aMTRP-4.19 (1.46, 12.0), pMFTP-1.35 (0.86, 2.13), and RPT-1.14 (0.85, 1.52), respectively. Conclusions. Tests of cutaneous allodynia, myofascial trigger points, and reduced pain thresholds are easily applied and well tolerated. The tests for cutaneous allodynia appear to have the greatest likelihood of identifying a visceral source of pain compared to somatic sources of pain. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2011 2011-11-03 /pmc/articles/PMC3216293/ /pubmed/22135736 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/692102 Text en Copyright © 2011 John Jarrell et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Jarrell, John
Giamberardino, Maria Adele
Robert, Magali
Nasr-Esfahani, Maryam
Bedside Testing for Chronic Pelvic Pain: Discriminating Visceral from Somatic Pain
title Bedside Testing for Chronic Pelvic Pain: Discriminating Visceral from Somatic Pain
title_full Bedside Testing for Chronic Pelvic Pain: Discriminating Visceral from Somatic Pain
title_fullStr Bedside Testing for Chronic Pelvic Pain: Discriminating Visceral from Somatic Pain
title_full_unstemmed Bedside Testing for Chronic Pelvic Pain: Discriminating Visceral from Somatic Pain
title_short Bedside Testing for Chronic Pelvic Pain: Discriminating Visceral from Somatic Pain
title_sort bedside testing for chronic pelvic pain: discriminating visceral from somatic pain
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3216293/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22135736
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/692102
work_keys_str_mv AT jarrelljohn bedsidetestingforchronicpelvicpaindiscriminatingvisceralfromsomaticpain
AT giamberardinomariaadele bedsidetestingforchronicpelvicpaindiscriminatingvisceralfromsomaticpain
AT robertmagali bedsidetestingforchronicpelvicpaindiscriminatingvisceralfromsomaticpain
AT nasresfahanimaryam bedsidetestingforchronicpelvicpaindiscriminatingvisceralfromsomaticpain