Cited by 7Pain Management and TreatmentAction Observation and SynchronizationPain Mechanisms and Treatments

Patients with complex regional pain syndrome overestimate applied force in observed hand actions

Hotta, J., Harno, H., Nummenmaa, L., Kalso, E., Hari, R., Forss, N.·2015·European Journal of Pain

Abstract

Background: Movement accuracy is ensured by interaction between motor, somatosensory, and visual systems. In complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), this interaction is disturbed. To explore CRPS patients’ visual perception of actions, we investigated how these patients evaluate the applied force in observed hand actions of another person. Methods: Nineteen patients suffering from unilateral upper‐limb CRPS and 19 healthy control subjects viewed six different videos of left‐ and right‐hand actions. They were asked to evaluate the applied force in each hand action, as well as their subjective sensations of unpleasantness and pain during the observation. Results: The patients overestimated the force applied in the videos: the ratings were two times as large as in the control subjects for actions performed with the hand corresponding to the patients’ affected hand, and 1.5 times as large for actions corresponding to their healthy hand. The control subjects considered the stimuli neutral and painless, whereas the patients rated them unpleasant. Moreover, the patients felt increased pain during viewing actions performed with the hand corresponding to their affected side. The overestimation of force was related to the elicited unpleasantness and pain, but not to the patients’ muscle strength. Conclusions: We propose that the overestimation of force is explained both by the pain elicited by the observation and by the abnormal sensorimotor integration that is associated with perception of increased effort. This visually elicited unpleasantness and painfulness may promote avoidance of viewing own actions, further impairing the patients’ motor performance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/ejp.669

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hotta, J., Harno, H., Nummenmaa, L., Kalso, E., Hari, R., & Forss, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
  • University of Turku (FI)
  • Aalto University (FI)
Corresponding author
Hotta, J.
Venue
European Journal of Pain
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-03-02
Volume
19
Issue
9
Pages
1372-1381
ISSN
  • 1090-3801 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2149
OpenAlex
W1995328465
Cited by
7
References
37
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
1.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Academy of Finland
  • Strategic Centre for Science, Technology and Innovation in Health and Well-being
  • European Research Council (232946)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
Keywords
complex regional pain syndrome, sensorimotor integration, unpleasantness, motor performance
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Hand, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Motor Activity, Visual Perception, Complex Regional Pain Syndromes, Young Adult, Pain Perception

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review