Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Authors:||Serrano, Gerardo Vinicio Beltran|
Rodrigues, Laura Pooch
Souza, Andressa de
Torres, Iraci L. S.
Antunes, Luciana da Conceição
|Title:||Comparison of hypnotic suggestion and transcranial direct-current stimulation effects on pain perception and the descending pain modulating system : a crossover randomized clinical trial|
|Keywords:||Brain-derivate-neurotrophic-factor;Conditioned pain modulation;Hypnotic analgesia;Pain;Pain threshold;Transcranial direct-current stimulation|
|Citation:||SERRANO, G. B. et al. Comparison of hypnotic suggestion and transcranial direct-current stimulation effects on pain perception and the descending pain modulating system: a crossover randomized clinical trial. Frontiers in neuroscience, v. 13, jun., 2019. Disponível em: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2019.00662/full. Acesso em: 14 set. 2021.|
|Abstract:||Objectives: This paper aims to determine if hypnotic analgesia suggestion and transcranial direct-current stimulation (tDCS) have a differential effect on pain perception. We hypothesized that transcranial direct-current stimulation would be more effective than hypnotic analgesia suggestion at changing the descending pain modulating system, whereas the hypnotic suggestion would have a greater effect in quantitative sensory testing. Design: This is a randomized, double blind and crossover trial. Settings: All stages of this clinical trial were performed at the Laboratory of Pain and Neuromodulation of the Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre. Subjects: Were included 24 healthy females aged from 18 to 45 years old, with a high susceptibility to hypnosis, according to the Waterloo-Stanford Group Scale of Hypnotic Susceptibility, Form C (15). Methods: The subjects received a random and crossover transcranial direct-current stimulation over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (2 mA for 20 min) and hypnotic analgesia (20 min). Results: Only hypnotic suggestion produced changes that are statistically significant from pre- to post-intervention in the following outcomes measures: heat pain threshold, heat pain tolerance, cold pressure test, and serum brain-derivate-neurotrophic-factor. The analysis showed a significant main effect for treatment (F = 4.32; P = 0.04) when we compared the delta-(1) of conditioned pain modulation task between the transcranial direct-current stimulation and hypnotic suggestion groups. Also, the change in the brain-derivate-neurotrophic-factor was positively correlated with the conditioned pain modulation task. Conclusion: The results confirm a differential effect between hypnotic suggestion and transcranial direct-current stimulation on the pain measures. They suggest that the impact of the interventions has differential neural mechanisms, since the hypnotic suggestion improved pain perception, whereas the transcranial direct-current stimulation increased inhibition of the descending pain modulating system. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT03744897. Perspective: These findings highlight the effect of hypnotic suggestion on contraregulating mechanisms involved in pain perception, while the transcranial direct-current stimulation increased inhibition of the descending pain modulating system. They could help clinicians comprehend the mechanisms involved in hypnotic analgesia and transcranial direct-current stimulation and thus may contribute to pain and disability management.|
|Appears in Collections:||Artigo de Periódico (PPGSDH)|
Files in This Item:
|gbserrano.et.al.pdf||Open Access||2,97 MB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.