Application of the grading system for “nociplastic pain” in chronic primary and chronic secondary pain conditions: a field study

The concept "nociplastic pain" has been developed for patients with features of nociceptive system sensitization that are not explained as nociceptive or neuropathic. Here, we tested how well the recently published grading system differentiates between chronic primary and secondary pain conditions. We recruited patients with fibromyalgia (FMS, n = 41), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS, n = 11), osteoarthritis (OA, n = 21), or peripheral nerve injury (PNI, n = 8). We used clinical history, pain drawings, quantitative sensory testing (QST), and questionnaires to classify their pains as possibly or probably "nociplastic." All patients with chronic primary pain exhibited widespread/regional pain not explainable by either nociceptive or neuropathic mechanisms. Widespread pain occurred in 12 patients with OA but was identified as nociceptive in 11 of 12. Regional pain occurred in 4 patients with PNI but was identified as neuropathic in 3 of 4. At this step, the grading system had 100% sensitivity and 93% specificity. Clinical evidence for pain hypersensitivity by QST, and history of hypersensitivity and mental comorbidities did not differentiate between chronic primary pain (QST: 36/52 = 69%, history: 43/52 = 83%) and secondary pain conditions (QST: 20/29 = 69%, history: 24/29 83%). Based on these data, specificity remained excellent (93%), but sensitivity dropped substantially (60%) due to lacking evidence for pain hypersensitivity in many patients with FMS. This low sensitivity suggests that the published grading system is not suitable for screening purposes. We suggest structural and content modifications to improve sensitivity, including placement of patient history before clinical examination and addition of a high tender point count as evidence for widespread pain hypersensitivity.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Pain
Published
2024-08-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/j.pain.0000000000003355
Citations
24
Primary Topic
Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
10.30

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Application of the grading system for “nociplastic pain” in chronic primary and chronic secondary pain conditions: a field study

Andreas Meyer‐Lindenberg, Heike Tost, Rolf‐Detlef Treede, Jonas Tesarz et al.
24 citations
Pain
Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
10.30
article

Application of the grading system for “nociplastic pain” in chronic primary and chronic secondary pain conditions: a field study

Andreas Meyer‐Lindenberg, Heike Tost, Rolf‐Detlef Treede, Jonas Tesarz, Armin Drusko, Hannah Schmidt, Lea Schlömp, Sigrid Schuh‐Hofer, Malika Renz
article en
24 citations

Abstract

The concept "nociplastic pain" has been developed for patients with features of nociceptive system sensitization that are not explained as nociceptive or neuropathic. Here, we tested how well the recently published grading system differentiates between chronic primary and secondary pain conditions. We recruited patients with fibromyalgia (FMS, n = 41), complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS, n = 11), osteoarthritis (OA, n = 21), or peripheral nerve injury (PNI, n = 8). We used clinical history, pain drawings, quantitative sensory testing (QST), and questionnaires to classify their pains as possibly or probably "nociplastic." All patients with chronic primary pain exhibited widespread/regional pain not explainable by either nociceptive or neuropathic mechanisms. Widespread pain occurred in 12 patients with OA but was identified as nociceptive in 11 of 12. Regional pain occurred in 4 patients with PNI but was identified as neuropathic in 3 of 4. At this step, the grading system had 100% sensitivity and 93% specificity. Clinical evidence for pain hypersensitivity by QST, and history of hypersensitivity and mental comorbidities did not differentiate between chronic primary pain (QST: 36/52 = 69%, history: 43/52 = 83%) and secondary pain conditions (QST: 20/29 = 69%, history: 24/29 83%). Based on these data, specificity remained excellent (93%), but sensitivity dropped substantially (60%) due to lacking evidence for pain hypersensitivity in many patients with FMS. This low sensitivity suggests that the published grading system is not suitable for screening purposes. We suggest structural and content modifications to improve sensitivity, including placement of patient history before clinical examination and addition of a high tender point count as evidence for widespread pain hypersensitivity.

PainVol. 166(1)
Heidelberg University (DE), University Hospital Heidelberg (DE), Central Institute of Mental Health (DE), University Medical Centre Mannheim (DE), University of Tübingen (DE)
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
10.30
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.