Abstract
BackgroundPressure pain thresholds (PPT) are commonly used to quantify mechanical pain sensitivity of deep structures. Excellent PPT reliability has been previously reported among the low back of healthy subjects. However, there is a lack of studies assessing PPT over the low back of workers exposed to biomechanical risk factors of low back pain. Thus, the purpose of this study was threefold: (1) to evaluate the intra-session absolute and relative reliability as well as minimal detectable change (MDC) values of PPT within 14 locations covering the low back region of vine-workers and (2) to determine the number of trial required to ensure reliable PPT assessments and (3) to assess the effect of modifier factors such as gender, age, body mass index (BMI) and pain intensity on PPT reliability.MethodsTwenty-nine vine-workers voluntarily participated in this study. Twenty-two reported low intensity of low-back pain while seven were pain-free. PPTs were assessed among 14 anatomical locations in the lower back region. Three trials were performed on each location with an interval time of at least one minute. Reliability was assessed computing intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM) for all possible combinations between trials. Bland-Altman plots were also generated to assess potential bias in the dataset. Finally, a repeated measure analysis of variance (RM-ANOVA) with the number of trials used as within subject factor was performed on (1) PPT, (2) ICC and (3) SEM values.ResultsICC ranged from 0.86 to 0.99 for all anatomical locations and for all possible combinations between trials. SEM for comparison between trial 1–2, 2–3, 1–3 and, 1-2-3 ranged from respectively, 36.7–77.5, 27.8–77.7, 50–95.2 and, 39.3–80.8 kPa. ICC and SEM remained similar to the ones obtained for the entire population when taking modifier factors in consideration. The visual analysis of Bland-Altman plots suggested small measurement errors for all anatomical locations and for all possible combinations between trials.ConclusionsThe assessment of PPTs of the lower back among vine-workers was found to have excellent relative and absolute reliability. Moreover, reliable measurements can be equally achieved when using the mean of three PPT measurement or with the first one.
Highlights
Pressure pain thresholds (PPT) are commonly used to quantify mechanical pain sensitivity of deep structures
Even if these self-reported methods of pain intensity are considered valid, reliable and responsive to change in the intensity of pain [13], they are largely influenced by psychosocial aspects related to the environment and the beliefs concerning the expected duration of pain [14]
The present study showed PPTs assessed over the low back region of vine-workers have excellent relative and absolute reliability
Summary
Pressure pain thresholds (PPT) are commonly used to quantify mechanical pain sensitivity of deep structures. There is a lack of studies assessing PPT over the low back of workers exposed to biomechanical risk factors of low back pain. In many studies dealing with WMSDs, visual analogue scale (VAS) and numeric rating scale (NRS) are commonly used to measure pain intensity in the low back region [11, 12]. Even if these self-reported methods of pain intensity are considered valid, reliable and responsive to change in the intensity of pain [13], they are largely influenced by psychosocial aspects related to the environment and the beliefs concerning the expected duration of pain [14]. Using pain diagram to depict painful areas does not in general offer the possibility to visualize the spatial distribution of pain sensitivity [19]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
