Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Stubbs, Brendon; Thompson, Trevor; Solmi, Marco; Vancampfort, Davy; Sergi, Giuseppe; Luchini, Claudio; Veronese, Nicola (2016)
Publisher: Elsevier B.V.
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: BF
Background: Clinical studies suggest people with Alzheimer's disease (AD) have altered pain sensitivity. Experimental pain research is equivocal.\ud \ud Objective: Conduct a meta-analysis to investigate if people with AD have altered pain sensitivity compared to healthy controls (HCs).\ud \ud Methods: Three authors searched electronic databases from inception till November 2015 for experimental pain studies in AD vs. HCs. Outcome measures were pain threshold, tolerance, pain ratings, heart rate response to nox- ious stimuli and the Facial Action Coding System (FACS). Random effect meta-analysis calculating Hedges' g ± 95% confidence intervals (CI) was conducted.\ud \ud Results: Thirteen studies were identified, including 256 people with AD (74.6 (±5.6) years, 59% females with a mean mini mental state examination (MMSE) score of 19.2) and 260 HCs. Meta-analysis demonstrated no signif- icant difference in pain threshold (g = 0.025, 95% CI −0.315-0.363, p = 0.88, n AD = 135, n HCs = 157), pain tolerance (g = −0.363, 95% CI −2.035-1.309, p = 0.67, n AD = 41, n HCs = 53) or pain intensity ratings (g = 0.03, p = 0.89, n AD = 138, n HCs = 135). Heart rate response to pain was less pronounced in AD but not significant (g = −0.746, p = 0.11). People with AD (n = 90) had significantly higher FACS scores versus HCs (n = 109) (g = 0.442, p = 0.03) indicating increased pain. Meta-regression demonstrated that an increasing percentage of AD female participants moderated pain threshold (p = 0.02) whilst MMSE scores did not (p = 0.19).\ud \ud Conclusion: People with AD have a greater sensitivity to pain when validated observer ratings of facial expres- sions are used. Verbal response to painful stimuli, even under experimental conditions, may mean pain is not identified in people with AD. Clinically useful observer rated pain tools may be the most appropriate way to as- sess pain in AD.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article