Relief of chronic pain may be accompanied by an increase in a measure of heart rate variability

Wearable Devices: Current Status and Opportunities in Pain Assessment and Management

INTRODUCTION

We investigated the possibilities and opportunities for using wearable devices that measure physical activity and physiometric signals in conjunction with ecological momentary assessment (EMA) data to improve the assessment and treatment of pain.

METHODS

We considered studies with cross-sectional and longitudinal designs as well as interventional or observational studies correlating pain scores with measures derived from wearable devices. A search was also performed on studies that investigated physical activity and physiometric signals among patients with pain.

RESULTS

Few studies have assessed the possibility of incorporating wearable devices as objective tools for contextualizing pain and physical function in free-living environments. Of the studies that have been conducted, most focus solely on physical activity and functional outcomes as measured by a wearable accelerometer. Several studies report promising correlations between pain scores and signals derived from wearable devices, objectively measured physical activity, and physical function. In addition, there is a known association between physiologic signals that can be measured by wearable devices and pain, though studies using wearable devices to measure these signals and associate them with pain in free-living environments are limited.

CONCLUSION

There exists a great opportunity to study the complex interplay between physiometric signals, physical function, and pain in a real-time fashion in free-living environments. The literature supports the hypothesis that wearable devices can be used to develop reproducible biosignals that correlate with pain. The combination of wearable devices and EMA will likely lead to the development of clinically meaningful endpoints that will transform how we understand and treat pain patients.

Observations of Autonomic Variability Following Central Neuromodulation for Chronic Neuropathic Pain in Spinal Cord Injury

BACKGROUND

Spinal cord injury (SCI) persons with chronic neuropathic pain (NP) demonstrate maladaptive autonomic profiles compared to SCI counterparts without NP (SCI - NP) or able-bodied (AB) controls. These aberrations may be secondary to maladaptive neuroplasticity in the shared circuitry of the pain neuromatrix-central autonomic network interface (PNM-CAN). In this study, we explored the proposed PNM-CAN mechanism in SCI + NP and AB cohorts following centrally-directed neuromodulation to assess if the PNM and CAN are capable of being differentially modulated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Central neuromodulation was administered via breathing-controlled electrical stimulation (BreEStim), previously evidenced to operate at the PNM. To quantify CAN activity, conventional heart rate variability (HRV) recordings were used to gather time and frequency domain parameters of autonomic modulation. SCI + NP (n = 10) and AB (n = 13) cohorts received null and active BreEStim randomly in crossover fashion. HRV data were gathered pretest and 30 minutes posttest. Pain modulation was quantified at both time-points by visual analog scale (VAS) for SCI + NP persons and electrical detection and pain threshold levels (EDT, EPT) for AB persons.

RESULTS

Following active BreEStim only, SCI + NP persons demonstrated increased parasympathetic tone (increased NN50, p = 0.03, and pNN50, p = 0.02, HRV parameters). This parasympathetic restoration was associated with analgesia (VAS reduction, p < 0.01). Similarly, AB persons demonstrated increased noxious tolerance (increased EPT, p = 0.03, with preserved EDL, p = 0.78) only following active BreEStim. However, this increased pain threshold was not associated with autonomic changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Central modulation targeting the PNM produced autonomic changes in SCI + NP persons but not AB persons. These findings suggest that AB persons exhibit intact CAN mechanisms capable of compensating for PNM aberrations or simply that SCI + NP persons exhibit altered PNM-CAN machinery altogether. Our collective findings confirm the interconnectedness and maladaptive plasticity of PNM-CAN machinery in SCI + NP persons and suggest that the PNM and CAN circuitry can be differentially modulated.

Neuropathic pain modulation after spinal cord injury by breathing-controlled electrical stimulation (BreEStim) is associated with restoration of autonomic dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Recent findings have implicated supraspinal origins from the pain neuromatrix- central autonomic network (PNM-CAN) in the generation of neuropathic pain (NP) after spinal cord injury (SCI). The aim of this study was to further investigate the theorized PNM-CAN mechanisms in persons with SCI by using a centrally directed pain intervention, provided by breathing-controlled electrical stimulation (BreEStim), to measure resultant autonomic changes measured by time and frequency domain heart rate variability (HRV) analysis.

METHODS

Null and active BreEStim interventions were administered to SCI+NP subjects (n=10) in a random order. HRV data and VAS pain scores were collected at resting pre-test and 30 minutes post-test time points. Resting HRV data were also collected from SCI-NP subjects (n=11).

RESULTS

SCI+NP subjects demonstrated a lower baseline HRV and parasympathetic tone, via SD of the normal-to-normal intervals (SDNN) and low frequency (LF) parameters, compared with SCI-NP subjects. However, following active BreEStim, SCI+NP subjects exhibited an increase in HRV and parasympathetic tone, most notably via pairs of successive R-R beat lengths varying by greater than 50 ms (NN50) and proportion of NN50 for total number of beats (pNN50) parameters along with lower VAS scores. Additionally, the post-test SCI+NP group was found to have a statistically comparable autonomic profile to the SCI-NP group across all HRV variables, including SDNN and LF parameters.

CONCLUSION

The analgesic effects of active BreEStim in SCI+NP subjects were associated with restoration of autonomic dysfunction in this population.

Heart Rate Variability: A Novel Modality for Diagnosing Neuropathic Pain after Spinal Cord Injury

Background: Heart rate variability (HRV), the physiological variance in the heart's R-R interval length, can be analyzed to produce various parameters reflective of one's autonomic balance. HRV analysis may be used to capture those autonomic aberrations associated with chronic neuropathic pain (NP) in spinal cord injury (SCI). This study assesses the capacity of HRV parameters to diagnose NP in an SCI cohort.

Methods: An electrocardiogram (ECG) was collected at rest from able bodied participants (AB, n = 15), participants with SCI only (SCI-NP, n = 11), and those with SCI and NP (SCI+NP, n = 20). HRV parameters were analyzed using conventional time and frequency analysis.

Results: At rest, there were no heart rate differences amongst groups. However, SCI+NP participants demonstrated lower overall HRV, as determined by the SDNN time domain parameter, compared to either AB (p < 0.01) or SCI-NP (p < 0.05) groups. Moreover, AB and SCI-NP participants were statistically comparable for all HRV time and frequency domain parameters. Additional analyses demonstrated no differences in HRV parameters between T4, above vs. T5, below SCI groups (for all parameters: p > 0.15) or between C8, above vs. T1, below SCI groups (p > 0.30).

Conclusions: Participants with SCI and NP exhibit a lower overall HRV, which can be determined by HRV time domain parameter SDNN. HRV analysis is an innovative modality with the capacity for objective quantification of chronic NP in participants with SCI.

Autonomic dysfunction in reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndromes

Background

Autonomic imbalance may play an important role in the pathogenesis of reversible cerebral vasoconstriction syndromes (RCVS). This study aimed to assess the autonomic function by analyzing heart rate variability (HRV) in patients with RCVS.

Methods

Patients with RCVS and age- and gender-matched controls were consecutively recruited. All patients (both ictal and remission stage) and controls underwent 24-hour ambulatory electrocardiographic (ECG) recordings. HRV measures covering time and frequency domains were used to assess autonomic functioning.

Results

Thirty-nine patients with RCVS and 39 controls completed the study. Compared to the controls, RCVS patients during the ictal stage showed reductions in parasympathetic-related indices, including the root mean square of difference of consecutive interbeat intervals (RMSSD) (22.1 ± 7.0 vs. 35.2 ± 14.2, p < 0.001), the percentage of adjacent intervals that varied by more than 50 ms (pNN50) (3.7 ± 3.4 vs. 10.6 ± 8.1, p < 0.001), and high-frequency power (HF) (5.82 ± 0.73 vs. 6.77 ± 0.74; p < 0.001), and increased low-frequency/high-frequency (LF/HF) ratio (index of sympathovagal balance) (3.38 ± 1.32 vs. 2.48 ± 1.07; p =0.001). These HRV indices improved partially but remained significantly different from controls during remission.

Conclusions

Decreased parasympathetic modulations and accentuated sympathetic activity might be a biological trait in patients with RCVS.

Statistical Issues in TBI Clinical Studies

The identification and longitudinal assessment of traumatic brain injury presents several challenges. Because these injuries can have subtle effects, efforts to find quantitative physiological measures that can be used to characterize traumatic brain injury are receiving increased attention. The results of this research must be considered with care. Six reasons for cautious assessment are outlined in this paper. None of the issues raised here are new. They are standard elements in the technical literature that describes the mathematical analysis of clinical data. The purpose of this paper is to draw attention to these issues because they need to be considered when clinicians evaluate the usefulness of this research. In some instances these points are demonstrated by simulation studies of diagnostic processes. We take as an additional objective the explicit presentation of the mathematical methods used to reach these conclusions. This material is in the appendices. The following points are made: (1) A statistically significant separation of a clinical population from a control population does not ensure a successful diagnostic procedure. (2) Adding more variables to a diagnostic discrimination can, in some instances, actually reduce classification accuracy. (3) A high sensitivity and specificity in a TBI versus control population classification does not ensure diagnostic successes when the method is applied in a more general neuropsychiatric population. (4) Evaluation of treatment effectiveness must recognize that high variability is a pronounced characteristic of an injured central nervous system and that results can be confounded by either disease progression or spontaneous recovery. A large pre-treatment versus post-treatment effect size does not, of itself, establish a successful treatment. (5) A procedure for discriminating between treatment responders and non-responders requires, minimally, a two phase investigation. This procedure must include a mechanism to discriminate between treatment responders, placebo responders, and spontaneous recovery. (6) A search for prodromes of neuropsychiatric disorders following traumatic brain injury can be implemented with these procedures.

Painful and painless diabetic neuropathy: one disease or two?

Painful diabetic polyneuropathy (PDPN) is generally considered a variant of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) but the identification of distinctive aspects that characterize painful compared with painless DPN has however been addressed in many studies, mainly with the purpose of better understanding the mechanisms of neuropathic pain in the scenario of peripheral nerve damage of DPN, of determining risk markers for pain development, and also of recognizing who might respond to treatments. This review is aimed at examining available literature dealing with the issue of similarities and differences between painful and painless DPN in an attempt to respond to the question of whether painful and painless DPN are the same disease or not and to address the conundrum of why some people develop the insensate variety of DPN whilst others experience distressing pain. Thus, from the perspective of comparing painful with painless forms of DPN, this review considers the clinical correlates of PDPN, its distinctive framework of symptoms, signs, and nerve functional and structural abnormalities, the question of large and small fiber involvement, the peripheral pain mechanisms, the central processing of pain and some new insights into the pathogenesis of pain in peripheral polyneuropathies and PDPN.