Cited by 192Pain Mechanisms and TreatmentsMusculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationFibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research

Health related quality of life and quantitative pain measurement in females with chronic non‐malignant pain

Open access
Laursen, Birgitte S., Bajaj, Priti, Olesen, Anders S., Delmar, Charlotte, Arendt‐Nielsen, Lars·2005·European Journal of Pain

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to assess, compare, and correlate the pain response to an experimental pain stimulus (hyperalgesia to pressure pain threshold (PPT) measured from different body sites), the pain intensity (VAS) of the habitual pain, and quality of life parameters (SF-36) in groups of females with chronic non-malignant pain syndromes. Forty female pain patients with fibromyalgia/whiplash (n = 10), endometriosis (n = 10), low back pain (n = 10), or rheumatoid arthritis (n = 10), as well as 41 age-matched healthy female controls participated in the study. The fibromyalgia/whiplash patients scored significantly higher (p < 0.04) VAS ratings (median rating = 7.0) than the endometriosis (6.0), low back pain (6.0), and rheumatoid arthritis (3.5) patients. All fours patient groups had significantly lower PPTs at all sites as compared with controls. The fibromyalgia/whiplash patients experienced the highest influence of pain on their overall health status, particularly vitality, social function, emotional problems, and mental health. A significant negative correlation was found between VAS rating and quality of life (p < 0.04). Significant correlation (p < 0.05) was found between pressure hyperalgesia measured at lowest PPT sites and the impairment of SF-36 physical function as well as mental health parameters. This study demonstrates significant generalised pressure hyperalgesia in four groups of chronic pain patients, correlations between degree of pressure hyperalgesia and impairment of some quality of life parameters, and increased pain intensity of the ongoing pain is associated with decreased quality of life.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ejpain.2004.07.003

Cites

42 of 42 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. Bennet R. Fibromyalgia. In: Giamberardino MA, editor. Pain 2002 - an updated review: refresher course syllabus. Seattle: IASP Press; 2002. p. 37-50.
  2. Bradley LA, Heuts PHTG, Cohen ML. A Biopsychosocial approach to fibromyalgia and chronic fatigue syndrome. In: Dostrovsky, et al., editors. Abstracts 10th World Congress on Pain. Seat- tle: IASP Press; 2002. p. 594.
  3. Jensen K. In: Quantification of tenderness by palpation and use of pressure algometers Advances in pain research and therapy. New York: Raven Press Ltd; 1990. p. 165-80.
  4. Kowalski JH, Lund I, Lundeberg T. VAS assessments do not produce quantitative data and is unreliable if treated as such. In: Abstracts 10th World Congress on Pain. Seattle: IASP Press; 2002. p. 463.
  5. Molines C, Bonin-Guillaume S, Rat P, Frances Y, Heim M. Which pain does VAS assess?. In: Abstracts 10th World Congress on Pain. Seattle: IASP Press; 2002. p. 340-1.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Laursen, B. S., Bajaj, P., Olesen, A. S., Delmar, C., & Arendt‐Nielsen, L.
Affiliations
  • Aalborg University Hospital (DK)
  • Aalborg University (DK)
Corresponding author
Arendt‐Nielsen, Lars
Venue
European Journal of Pain
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005-06
Volume
9
Issue
3
Pages
267-267
ISSN
  • 1090-3801 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2149
OpenAlex
W2168850271
Cited by
191
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 8
FWCI
4.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Pain (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VBN Forskningsportal (Aalborg Universitet) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Fibromyalgia and Chronic Fatigue Syndrome Research
Keywords
health-related quality of life, chronic non-cancer pain, pressure pain threshold, pain intensity, fibromyalgia, whiplash injury, endometriosis, low back pain, rheumatoid arthritis, women, SF-36, physical function, mental health
MeSH terms
Adult, Arthritis, Chronic Disease, Cross-Sectional Studies, Endometriosis, Female, Fibromyalgia, Health Status, Humans, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Quality of Life, Whiplash Injuries, Case-Control Studies, Low Back Pain, Pain Threshold

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