FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W3043163196> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W3043163196 endingPage "1448" @default.
• W3043163196 startingPage "1446" @default.
• W3043163196 abstract "Persistent pain is a major healthcare problem worldwide, costing billions of dollars each year and being commonly refractory to existing treatments [for citations, see 1]. We read with interest the recent research article by Hagiwara et al. [[2]Hagiwara K. Perchet C. Frot M. Bastuji H. Garcia-Larrea L. Cortical modulation of nociception by galvanic vestibular stimulation: a potential clinical tool?.Brain Stimul. 2020; 13: P60-P68https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2019.10.009Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (4) Google Scholar] in your journal, in which it was reported that active, but not sham, galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS), significantly modulated experimental pain in 16 healthy volunteers. GVS stimulates the vestibular system via direct current applied to bilateral mastoids, inducing activation in various vestibular, cognitive, affective and pain-related brain regions. A simpler and better-known method for such stimulation is caloric vestibular stimulation (CVS), which has been used for decades to diagnose brain death and vestibular disorders. This technique involves irrigation of cold water into the external ear canal, eliciting subjective vertigo and observable nystagmus. Small case series report that CVS can reduce pain in post-stroke thalamic pain syndrome [see e.g. 3] as well as pain following spinal cord injury or amputation [reviewed in [4]Miller S.M. Ngo T.T. Studies of caloric vestibular stimulation: Implications for the cognitive neurosciences, the clinical neurosciences and neurophilosophy.Acta Neuropsychiatr. 2007; 19: 183-203https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-5215.2007.00208.xCrossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar; see also [5]Aranda-Moreno C. Jáuregui-Renaud K. Reyes-Espinosa J. Andrade-Galicia A. Bastida-Segura A.E. González Carrazco L.G. Stimulation of the semicircular canals or the utricles by clinical tests can modify the intensity of phantom limb pain.Front Neurol. 2019; 10: 1-10https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2019.00117Crossref PubMed Scopus (4) Google Scholar]. Both CVS and GVS are now being examined in a variety of neurological and psychiatric therapeutic contexts, and in cognitive neuroscience studies [reviewed in [4]Miller S.M. Ngo T.T. Studies of caloric vestibular stimulation: Implications for the cognitive neurosciences, the clinical neurosciences and neurophilosophy.Acta Neuropsychiatr. 2007; 19: 183-203https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-5215.2007.00208.xCrossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar, 6Been G. Ngo T.T. Miller S.M. Fitzgerald P.B. The use of tDCS and CVS as methods of non-invasive brain stimulation.Brain Res Rev. 2007; 56: 346-361https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainresrev.2007.08.001Crossref PubMed Scopus (143) Google Scholar, 7Grabherr L. Macauda G. Lenggenhager B. The moving history of vestibular stimulation as a therapeutic intervention.Multisensory Res. 2015; 28: 653-687https://doi.org/10.1163/22134808-00002495Crossref PubMed Scopus (23) Google Scholar, 8Miller S.M. Vestibular neuromodulation: Stimulating the neural crossroads of psychiatric illness.Bipolar Disord. 2016; 18: 539-543https://doi.org/10.1111/bdi.12427Crossref PubMed Scopus (9) Google Scholar]. Hagiwara et al. [[2]Hagiwara K. Perchet C. Frot M. Bastuji H. Garcia-Larrea L. Cortical modulation of nociception by galvanic vestibular stimulation: a potential clinical tool?.Brain Stimul. 2020; 13: P60-P68https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2019.10.009Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (4) Google Scholar] note that some post-stroke pain patients [[3]McGeoch P.D. Williams L.E. Lee R.R. Ramachandran V.S. Behavioural evidence for vestibular stimulation as a treatment for central post-stroke pain.J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2008; 79: 1298-1301https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp.2008.146738Crossref PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar] found the administration of CVS to be intolerable, even if the technique induced pain relief. They reported that GVS, on the other hand, was well tolerated by their healthy subjects, thus proposing that if GVS also reduces pain in persistent (chronic) pain patients, it would be a tolerable therapeutic option when CVS is not tolerated. The issue of CVS tolerability is important to examine because the technique is exceedingly easy to administer, is inexpensive, requires no special equipment, and — if shown to be efficacious — could be readily implemented by medical practitioners and potentially self-administered by patients (albeit with prior training and due care). If CVS is inaccurately perceived to be poorly tolerated, this could prevent its appropriate examination as a potential simple and readily accessible therapeutic brain stimulation technique. We conducted a convenience-based non-randomised effectiveness trial of CVS (using iced water), with a single-blinded control for short-term pain modulation effects (an ice-pack applied to the forehead), in 8 patients with phantom limb pain (PLP), 12 with spinal cord injury pain (SCIP), 14 with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS; types I & II), and 4 with non-specific persistent pain (NPP) [[1]Ngo T.T. Barsdell W.N. Law P.C.F. Arnold C.A. Chou M.J. Nunn A.K. et al.Bedside neuromodulation of persistent pain and allodynia using caloric vestibular stimulation: an effectiveness trial.J Neurol Sci. 2015; 357: e91https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2015.08.304Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Google Scholar,[9]Ngo T.T. Barsdell W.N. Law P.C.F. Arnold C.A. Chou M.J. Nunn A.K. et al.Bedside neuromodulation of persistent pain and allodynia using caloric vestibular stimulation: an effectiveness trial.J Neurol Sci. 2015; 357: e91https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jns.2015.08.304Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF Google Scholar]. We report the modulation effects of CVS on persistent pain and allodynia in detail elsewhere [1, see also 9], but in summary, a single session of cold-water CVS significantly reduced pain relative to the ice-pack control within 30 minutes post-intervention. Although the magnitude of pain reductions in some groups was modest and there were many non-responders, the CRPS group appeared most responsive and also exhibited striking cases of allodynia modulation following CVS. Here we report findings on tolerability of CVS administration in this persistent pain cohort. Participants provided written, informed consent, in accordance with a protocol approved by the Alfred Health Human Research Ethics Committee, Austin Health Human Research Ethics Committee, and Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee. All procedures [see 1] satisfied the standards of the Declaration of Helsinki (1975). All 38 patients rated their pain and, if applicable, allodynia, before and after CVS, and in addition 25 patients (11 CRPS, 9 SCIP, 3 PLP, 2 NPP) also formally rated their experience of CVS. The latter included whether CVS was uncomfortable or painful (including intensity scores), and whether they experienced nausea or headache (and associated intensity) or other symptoms. These 25 patients were additionally asked if they would repeat the procedure if it reduced their pain by 50% or more for 1 week or for 1 month. Vertigo and nystagmus occurred for all patients following CVS, as expected. Fig. 1 depicts the formal CVS tolerability data and Fig. 1 caption describes additional results. We found the vast majority of patients reported that despite finding the procedure uncomfortable or painful, or experiencing side-effects, they were willing to repeat the intervention if it helped their pain. Our data show CVS to be a well-tolerated intervention in a persistent pain cohort. While GVS, if shown to be therapeutically efficacious, may be an option for patients who are not able to tolerate CVS (such as our patient with repeated emesis; see Fig. 1 caption), our data suggest such subjects are not observed frequently in persistent pain cohorts. A recent study [[10]Kelly E.A. Stocker C. Kempton C.M. Dierking D.M. Fehlberg H.E. Adams M.E. Vestibular testing: patient perceptions, morbidity, and opportunity costs.Otol Neurotol. 2018; 39: 1222-1228https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000002025Crossref PubMed Scopus (10) Google Scholar] of CVS side-effects in the vestibular diagnostic setting reported that of 130 patients, 75 (58%) experienced undesirable symptoms including nausea (50%), vomiting (5%), and headaches (12%). However, distress and nausea ratings were generally low (<3/10), except in 19 (15%) patients who discontinued testing early. For that study though, it is important to note that vestibular dysfunction patients were examined, not persistent pain patients. Patients with persistent pain are usually familiar with, and therefore more willing to undergo, uncomfortable interventions especially to treat rather than just diagnose their condition. Moreover, CVS in diagnostic settings is part of an overall suite of investigations [[10]Kelly E.A. Stocker C. Kempton C.M. Dierking D.M. Fehlberg H.E. Adams M.E. Vestibular testing: patient perceptions, morbidity, and opportunity costs.Otol Neurotol. 2018; 39: 1222-1228https://doi.org/10.1097/MAO.0000000000002025Crossref PubMed Scopus (10) Google Scholar] that is more onerous than the single CVS sessions used in the present study. Importantly, tolerability of CVS needs consideration in the context of other persistent pain treatments and the consequences of poorly treated persistent pain. For example, oral pharmacotherapy frequently causes side-effects of longer duration and of far more concern than transient nausea/headache, and can be associated with dependence, sedation and mortality risk, while ketamine infusions are frequently ceased due to intolerable adverse psychological side-effects, and invasive persistent pain interventions may involve significant initial discomfort and longer-term morbidity risk [for citations, see 1]. In the context of available persistent pain management options, the side-effect profile of CVS reported here suggests it is likely to be considered an acceptable intervention, notwithstanding some patients for whom the technique will not be tolerated. It remains to be determined with carefully conducted randomised controlled trials whether CVS is an efficacious therapeutic intervention for managing persistent pain. However, it is clear from the data we present here that tolerability of CVS in such cohorts should pose no barrier to investigating the technique or to its potential implementation. The authors confirm that they meet the requirements for authorship. We thank all volunteers who participated in the study, and Steven Hill and Peter New for assistance in recruiting participants with SCIP. TTN was supported by a National Health & Medical Research Council of Australia Clinical Research Fellowship (ID 490976 ). WNB was supported by an Australian Postgraduate Award scholarship. PBF is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship ( 1078567 ). SMM was supported by a Victorian Neurotrauma Initiative Early Career Practitioner Fellowship. SMM has received equipment for research from Soterix Medical Inc. PBF has received equipment for research from MagVenture A/S, Medtronic Ltd, Neuronetics and Brainsway Ltd , and funding for research from Neuronetics. He is on scientific advisory boards for Bionomics Ltd, and LivaNova and is a founder of TMS Clinics Australia. SMM and AKN have received funding from Monash Institute of Medical Engineering to examine methods for CVS self-administration. If such methods are commercialised, Monash University, Monash Alfred Psychiatry Research Centre, and authors SMM and AKN would receive royalties. The funding sources had no involvement in the conducting of this study or the writing of this paper." @default.
• W3043163196 created "2020-07-23" @default.
• W3043163196 creator A5007657362 @default.
• W3043163196 creator A5015298886 @default.
• W3043163196 creator A5030854548 @default.
• W3043163196 creator A5031721186 @default.
• W3043163196 creator A5057181717 @default.
• W3043163196 creator A5065905665 @default.
• W3043163196 creator A5066647110 @default.
• W3043163196 creator A5073280638 @default.
• W3043163196 creator A5074757064 @default.
• W3043163196 creator A5083159520 @default.
• W3043163196 date "2020-09-01" @default.
• W3043163196 modified "2023-09-25" @default.
• W3043163196 title "Tolerability of caloric vestibular stimulation in a persistent pain cohort" @default.
• W3043163196 cites W2076072829 @default.
• W3043163196 cites W2085494944 @default.
• W3043163196 cites W2142496084 @default.
• W3043163196 cites W2461903053 @default.
• W3043163196 cites W2520774167 @default.
• W3043163196 cites W2900892354 @default.
• W3043163196 cites W2915480339 @default.
• W3043163196 cites W2979943281 @default.
• W3043163196 cites W812352508 @default.
• W3043163196 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brs.2020.07.003" @default.
• W3043163196 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32693181" @default.
• W3043163196 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W3043163196 type Work @default.
• W3043163196 sameAs 3043163196 @default.
• W3043163196 citedByCount "1" @default.
• W3043163196 countsByYear W30431631962020 @default.
• W3043163196 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W3043163196 hasAuthorship W3043163196A5007657362 @default.
• W3043163196 hasAuthorship W3043163196A5015298886 @default.
• W3043163196 hasAuthorship W3043163196A5030854548 @default.
• W3043163196 hasAuthorship W3043163196A5031721186 @default.
• W3043163196 hasAuthorship W3043163196A5057181717 @default.
• W3043163196 hasAuthorship W3043163196A5065905665 @default.
• W3043163196 hasAuthorship W3043163196A5066647110 @default.
• W3043163196 hasAuthorship W3043163196A5073280638 @default.
• W3043163196 hasAuthorship W3043163196A5074757064 @default.
• W3043163196 hasAuthorship W3043163196A5083159520 @default.
• W3043163196 hasBestOaLocation W30431631961 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C126322002 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C190041318 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C190362976 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C197934379 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C24998067 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C2778375690 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C548259974 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C72563966 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConcept C99508421 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C126322002 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C190041318 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C190362976 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C197934379 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C24998067 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C2778375690 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C42219234 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C548259974 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C71924100 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C72563966 @default.
• W3043163196 hasConceptScore W3043163196C99508421 @default.
• W3043163196 hasFunder F4320315792 @default.
• W3043163196 hasFunder F4320334705 @default.
• W3043163196 hasIssue "5" @default.
• W3043163196 hasLocation W30431631961 @default.
• W3043163196 hasLocation W30431631962 @default.
• W3043163196 hasOpenAccess W3043163196 @default.
• W3043163196 hasPrimaryLocation W30431631961 @default.
• W3043163196 hasRelatedWork W196038172 @default.
• W3043163196 hasRelatedWork W2021324300 @default.
• W3043163196 hasRelatedWork W2077999962 @default.
• W3043163196 hasRelatedWork W2129320640 @default.
• W3043163196 hasRelatedWork W2178178393 @default.
• W3043163196 hasRelatedWork W2331022194 @default.
• W3043163196 hasRelatedWork W2390837335 @default.
• W3043163196 hasRelatedWork W2570692763 @default.
• W3043163196 hasRelatedWork W2994415010 @default.
• W3043163196 hasRelatedWork W4376131306 @default.
• W3043163196 hasVolume "13" @default.
• W3043163196 isParatext "false" @default.
• W3043163196 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W3043163196 magId "3043163196" @default.
• W3043163196 workType "article" @default.