Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Reliability of the nociceptive blink reflex evoked by electrical stimulation of the trigeminal nerve in humans

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

The nociceptive blink reflex (nBR) can be useful to investigate trigeminal nociceptive function. The aim of this study was to estimate the reliability of the nBR evoked by electrical stimulation of the three branches of the trigeminal nerve under the following conditions: over time (test-retest and intrarater reliability) and by two examiners (interrater reliability).

Materials and methods

Twenty-one healthy participants were evaluated in two sessions (24 h apart). The nBR was elicited by a so-called “nociceptive-specific” electrode placed over the entry zone of the right supraorbital (V1R), infraorbital (V2R), mental (V3R), and left infraorbital (V2L) nerve. The outcomes were individual electrical sensory (I 0) and pain thresholds (I P); root mean square (RMS), area-under-the-curve (AUC), and onset latencies of R2 responses (determined twice after a recalibration session); and stimulus-evoked pain on a 0–10 numerical rating scale. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and Kappa statistics were computed (α = 5%).

Results

ICCs were fair to excellent in 82% of the psychophysical measures (fair 21%, good 31%, excellent 30%) and in 86% of V1R, V2R, and V2L nBR parameters, whereas 52% of V3R showed poor reliability. ICCs for intrarater reliability were fair to good in 70% of measurements (fair 20%, good 50%) and in 75% of interrater measurements after the recalibration (fair 55%, good 20%). All kappa values showed at least fair agreement and the majority of the nBR measures (93%) presented moderate to excellent reliability.

Conclusion

The nBR and its associated psychophysical measures can be considered a sufficiently reliable test.

Clinical significance

The nBR can be recommended as an electrophysiological technique to assess trigeminal nociceptive function.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Backonja MM, Attal N, Baron R, Bouhassira D, Drangholt M, Dyck PJ, Edwards RR, Freeman R, Gracely R, Haanpaa MH, Hansson P, Hatem SM, Krumova EK, Jensen TS, Maier C, Mick G, Rice AS, Rolke R, Treede RD, Serra J, Toelle T, Tugnoli V, Walk D, Walalce MS, Ware M, Yarnitsky D, Ziegler D (2013) Value of quantitative sensory testing in neurological and pain disorders: NeuPSIG consensus. Pain 154:1807–1819

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kersten P, White PJ, Tennant A (2014) Is the pain visual analogue scale linear and responsive to change? An exploration using Rasch analysis. PLoS One 9:e99485

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Galeotti F, Truini A, Cruccu G (2006) Neurophysiological assessment of craniofacial pain. J Headache Pain 7:61–69

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Kimura J (1989) The blink reflex. In: Kimura J (ed) Book title, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  5. Pearce JM (2008) Observations on the blink reflex. Eur Neurol 59:221–223

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ellrich J, Hopf HC (1996) The R3 component of the blink reflex: normative data and application in spinal lesions. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 101:349–354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ellrich J (2000) Brain stem reflexes: probing human trigeminal nociception. News Physiol Sci 15:94–97

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Kaube H, Katsarava Z, Kaufer T, Diener H, Ellrich J (2000) A new method to increase nociception specificity of the human blink reflex. Clin Neurophysiol 111:413–416

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. de Tommaso M (2013) Reply to "Activating selectively and reliably nociceptive afferents with concentric electrode stimulation: yes we can! Provided that low stimulus intensities are used!". Clin Neurophysiol 124:424–425

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. de Tommaso M, Santostasi R, Devitofrancesco V, Franco G, Vecchio E, Delussi M, Livrea P, Katzarava Z (2011) A comparative study of cortical responses evoked by transcutaneous electrical vs CO(2) laser stimulation. Clin Neurophysiol 122:2482–2487

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Perchet C, Frot M, Charmarty A, Flores C, Mazza S, Magnin M, Garcia-Larrea L (2012) Do we activate specifically somatosensory thin fibres with the concentric planar electrode? A scalp and intracranial EEG study. Pain 153:1244–1252

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Rehberg B, Baars JH, Kotsch J, Koppe P, von Dincklage F (2012) Comparison of trigeminal and spinal modulation of pain and nociception. Int J Neurosci 122:298–304

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Giffin NJ, Kowacs F, Libri V, Williams P, Goadsby PJ, Kaube H (2003) Effect of the adenosine A1 receptor agonist GR79236 on trigeminal nociception with blink reflex recordings in healthy human subjects. Cephalalgia 23:287–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Baad-Hansen L, List T, Jensen TS, Leijon G, Svensson P (2005) Blink reflexes in patients with atypical odontalgia. J Orofac Pain 19:239–247

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Baad-Hansen L, List T, Kaube H, Jensen TS, Svensson P (2006) Blink reflexes in patients with atypical odontalgia and matched healthy controls. Exp Brain Res 172:498–506

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kaube H, Katsarava Z, Przywara S, Drepper J, Ellrich J, Diener HC (2002) Acute migraine headache: possible sensitization of neurons in the spinal trigeminal nucleus? Neurology 58:1234–1238

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Peddireddy A, Wang K, Svensson P, Arendt-Nielsen L (2009) Blink reflexes in chronic tension-type headache patients and healthy controls. Clin Neurophysiol 120:1711–1716

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bannigan K, Watson R (2009) Reliability and validity in a nutshell. J Clin Nurs 18:3237–3243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, Bouter LM, de Vet HC (2010) The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 63:737–745

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Katsarava Z, Ellrich J, Diener HC, Kaube H (2002) Optimized stimulation and recording parameters of human 'nociception specific' blink reflex recordings. Clin Neurophysiol 113:1932–1936

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. von Dincklage F, Koppe P, Kotsch J, Baars JH, Rehberg B (2010) Investigation of threshold and magnitude criteria of the nociceptive blink reflex. Clin Neurophysiol 121:945–949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Blumenthal TD, Cuthbert BN, Filion DL, Hackley S, Lipp OV, van Boxtel A (2005) Committee report: guidelines for human startle eyeblink electromyographic studies. Psychophysiology 42:1–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Ellrich J, Treede RD (1998) Characterization of blink reflex interneurons by activation of diffuse noxious inhibitory controls in man. Brain Res 803:161–168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rosner B (2006) Fundementals of biostatistics. Thomson Brooks/Cole, Duxbury

    Google Scholar 

  25. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mouraux A, Iannetti GD, Plaghki L (2010) Low intensity intra-epidermal electrical stimulation can activate Adelta-nociceptors selectively. Pain 150:199–207

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Romaniello A, Valls-Sole J, Iannetti GD, Truini A, Manfredi M, Cruccu G (2002) Nociceptive quality of the laser-evoked blink reflex in humans. J Neurophysiol 87:1386–1394

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Jaaskelainen SK (1995) Electrophysiological study of blink reflex in humans: differences in mental and supraorbital nerves. Acta Physiol Scand 154:143–150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Jaaskelainen SK (1995) Blink reflex with stimulation of the mental nerve. Methodology, reference values, and some clinical vignettes. Acta Neurol Scand 91:477–482

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Cruccu G, Sommer C, Anand P, Attal N, Baron R, Garcia-Larrea L, Haanpaa M, Jensen TS, Serra J, Treede RD (2010) EFNS guidelines on neuropathic pain assessment: revised 2009. Eur J Neurol 17:1010–1018

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Ongerboer de Visser BW, Moffie D (1979) Effects of brain-stem and thalamic lesions on the corneal reflex: an electrophysiological and anatomical study. Brain 102:595–608

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. de Vet HCT, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DK (2011) Measurement in medicine: a practical guide. Cambridge University Press, Suffolk

    Book  Google Scholar 

  33. Forssell H, Jaaskelainen S, Tenovuo O, Hinkka S (2002) Sensory dysfunction in burning mouth syndrome. Pain 99:41–47

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Forssell H, Tenovuo O, Silvoniemi P, Jaaskelainen SK (2007) Differences and similarities between atypical facial pain and trigeminal neuropathic pain. Neurology 69:1451–1459

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Teerijoki-Oksa T, Jaaskelainen SK, Forssell K, Forssell H (2004) Recovery of nerve injury after mandibular sagittal split osteotomy. Diagnostic value of clinical and electrophysiologic tests in the follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 33:134–140

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Topka H, Hallett M (1992) Perioral reflexes in orofacial dyskinesia and spasmodic dysphonia. Muscle Nerve 15:1016–1022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Baad-Hansen L, Pigg M, Yang G, List T, Svensson P, Drangsholt M (2015) Reliability of intra-oral quantitative sensory testing (QST) in patients with atypical odontalgia and healthy controls—a multicentre study. J Oral Rehabil 42:127–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Pigg M, Baad-Hansen L, Svensson P, Drangsholt M, List T (2010) Reliability of intraoral quantitative sensory testing (QST). Pain 148:220–226

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Rolke R, Baron R, Maier C, Tolle TR, Treede RD, Beyer A, Binder A, Birbaumer N, Birklein F, Botefur IC, Braune S, Flor H, Huge V, Klug R, Landwehrmeyer GB, Magerl W, Maihofner C, Rolko C, Schaub C, Scherens A, Sprenger T, Valet M, Wasserka B (2006) Quantitative sensory testing in the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS): standardized protocol and reference values. Pain 123:231–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Kottner J, Audige L, Brorson S, Donner A, Gajewski BJ, Hrobjartsson A, Roberts C, Shoukri M, Streiner DL (2011) Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed. J Clin Epidemiol 64:96–106

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Giffin NJ, Katsarava Z, Pfundstein A, Ellrich J, Kaube H (2004) The effect of multiple stimuli on the modulation of the 'nociceptive' blink reflex. Pain 108:124–128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Jaaskelainen SK, Forssell H, Tenovuo O (1999) Electrophysiological testing of the trigeminofacial system: aid in the diagnosis of atypical facial pain. Pain 80:191–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Danish Dental Association, by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES—Proc. no BEX 4306/14-7) and by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), grant # 2015/09913-4.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yuri Martins Costa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Funding

This study was supported by the Danish Dental Association, by the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES—Proc. no BEX 4306/14-7), and by the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP), grant # 2015/09913-4.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Finally, this study had the approval from the Regional Ethics Committee as well as the Danish Data Protection Agency.

Informed consent

All participants gave their voluntary consent after a full explanation of all procedures.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Costa, Y.M., Baad-Hansen, L., Bonjardim, L.R. et al. Reliability of the nociceptive blink reflex evoked by electrical stimulation of the trigeminal nerve in humans. Clin Oral Invest 21, 2453–2463 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-2042-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-2042-6

Keywords

Navigation