Chronic Pain Patients’ Gaze Patterns toward Pain-Related Information: Comparison between Pictorial and Linguistic Stimuli

Attention Bias to Pain Words Comes Early and Cognitive Load Matters: Evidence from an ERP Study on Experimental Pain

Attention bias (AB) is a common cognitive challenge for patients with pain. In this study, we tested at what stage AB to pain occurs in participants with experimental pain (EP) and tested whether cognitive load interferes with it. We recruited 40 healthy adults aged 18-27 years, and randomized them into control and EP groups. We sprayed the participants in the EP group with 10% capsaicin paste to mimic acute pain and those in the control group with water, accessing both groups' behavioral results and event-related potential data. We found that high-load tasks had longer response times and lower accuracies than low-load tasks did and that different neural processing of words occurred between the groups. The EP group exhibited AB to pain at an early stage with both attentional avoidance (N1 latency) and facilitated attention (P2 amplitude) to pain words. The control group coped with semantic differentiation (N1) at first, followed by pain word discrimination (P2). In addition, AB to pain occurred only in low-load tasks. As the cognitive load multiplied, we did not find AB in the EP group. Therefore, our study adds further evidence for AB to pain, suggesting the implementation of cognitive load in future AB therapy.

Ignoring space around a painful limb? No evidence for a body-related visuospatial attention bias in complex regional pain syndrome

BACKGROUND

Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) is a disorder of severe chronic pain in one or more limb(s). People with CRPS report unusual perceptions of the painful limb suggesting altered body representations, as well as difficulty attending to their affected limb (i.e., a 'neglect-like' attention bias). Altered body representations and attention in CRPS might be related, however, existing evidence is unclear. We hypothesized that if there were a body-related visuospatial attention bias in CRPS, then any attention bias away from the affected side should be larger for or limited to circumstances when the (impaired) body representation is involved in the task versus when this is not the case.

METHODS

We included 40 people with CRPS, 40 with other limb pain conditions, and 40 pain-free controls. In half of the people with pain, their upper limb was affected, in the other half their lower limb. We administered computerized tasks of spatial attention, including free viewing of images, shape cancellation, temporal order judgement, and dot-probe. The degree to which different versions of each task involved body representation was manipulated by one or more of the following: (1) presenting stimuli nearer versus further away from the body, (2) using body related versus neutral stimuli, and (3) inducing mental rotation of body parts versus no mental rotation. In addition to perceptual judgements, eye movements were recorded as a sensitive index of spatial attention. Bayesian repeated measures analyses were performed.

RESULTS

We found no evidence for a (body-related) visuospatial attention bias in upper limb CRPS. Secondary analyses suggested the presence of a body-related visuospatial attention bias away from the affected side in some participants with lower limb CRPS.

DISCUSSION

Our results add to growing evidence that there might be no general visuospatial attention bias away from the affected side in CRPS.

Attentional Patterns Toward Pain-Related Information: Comparison Between Chronic Pain Patients and Non-pain Control Group

Although the evidence for attentional bias to pain-related information among individuals with chronic pain has been well established, there are a number of inconsistencies in the research that have been observed due to sample characteristics. Therefore, the present study expanded upon previous studies by including patients with a variety of chronic pain conditions and compared a chronic pain patient sample with healthy community sample. We also investigated how pain catastrophizing and other psychological factors in chronic pain patients affected attentional patterns to pain-related information. Forty chronic pain patients from the departments of neurology and rheumatology of an academic medical center hospital and 40 participants without chronic pain from a university that is located in Seoul, South Korea were recruited for the present study. Patients observed pictures of faces displaying pain that were presented simultaneously with faces with neutral expressions, while their eye movements were measured using an eye-tracking system. Independent t-tests were conducted to investigate attentional preferences to pain stimuli between the chronic pain and control groups. No significant attentional differences in pain-neutral pairs were found for both chronic pain and control group. A one-way MANOVA was conducted to examine the role of pain catastrophizing on psychological factors and attentional engagement to pain stimuli. No significant results for the attentional bias to pain stimuli among chronic pain patients may indicate that chronic pain patients who have suffered from chronic pain for a long time and have been treated for their chronic pain in the hospital may interpret pain-related information not as threatening. Clinical implications related to use in pain treatment and future research suggestions are discussed.