Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:13:33.294Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Averaged evoked response in patients with psychogenic pain1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 July 2009

Joan Mushin  and
Raymond Levy
Joan Mushin
Affiliation:
Middlesex Hospital Medical School, London
Raymond Levy
Affiliation:
Middlesex Hospital Medical School, London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Synopsis

Cortical somatosensory evoked responses to stimuli of various intensities were recorded in a group of patients with a diagnosis of ‘psychogenic pain’ and in three separate control groups. Differences emerged in the relationship between stimulus intensity and response amplitude. It is suggested that patients with psychogenic pain tended to deal with small stimuli in the way in which the other groups of patients dealt with large stimuli.

Type
Research Article
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 4 , Issue 1 , February 1974 , pp. 19 - 27
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Alexander, L. (1962). Differential diagnosis between psychogenie and physical pain. Journal of the American Medical Association, 181, 855–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnet, A. B., and Lodge, A. (1966). Diagnosis of deafness in infants with the use of computer-averaged electroencephalographic responses to sound. Journal of Pediatrics, 69, 753–758.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Behrman, J. (1969). The visual evoked response in hysterical amblyopia. British Journal of Ophthalmology, 53, 839–845.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buchsbaum, M., and Silverman, J. (1968). Stimulus intensity control and the cortical evoked response. Psychosomatic Medicine, 30, 12–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeBecker, J., and Desmedt, J. E. (1965). Les potentiels évoqués cérébraux et les potentiels de nerf sensible chez l'homme. Acta Neurologica et Psychiatrica Belgica, 64, 1212–1248.Google Scholar
Engel, G. L. (1959). Psychogenic pain and the pain-prone patient. American Journal of Medicine, 26, 899–918.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gartside, I. B., Lippold, O. C., and Meldrum, B. S. (1966). The evoked cortical somatosensory response in normal man and its modification by oral lithium carbonate. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 20, 382–390.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giblin, D. R. (1964). Somatosensory evoked potentials in healthy subjects and in patients with lesions of the nervous System. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 112, 93–142.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Halliday, A. M., and Wakefield, G. S. (1963). Cerebral evoked potentials in patients with dissociated sensory loss. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry, 26, 211–219.Google ScholarPubMed
Kamphuisen, H. A., and Storm van Leeuwen, W. (1968). Response to sine wave modulated light in normal subjects and in patients. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 24, 289.Google ScholarPubMed
Levy, R., and Behrman, J. (1970). Cortical evoked responses in hysterical hemianaesthesia. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 29, 400–402.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levy, R., Isaacs, A., and Behrman, J. (1971). Neurophysio logical correlates of senile dementia: 2. The somatosensory evoked response. Psychological Medicine, 1, 159–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lüders, H. (1970). The effects of aging on the wave form of the somatosensory cortical evoked potential. Eleclroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 29, 450–460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Melzack, R., and Wall, P. D. (1965). Pain mechanisms: a new theory. Science, 150, 971–979.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merskey, H., and Spear, F. G. (1967). Pain; psychological and Psychiatric aspects. Baillière: London.Google Scholar
Petrie, A. (1967). Individuality in Pain and Suffering. University of Chicago Press: Chicago.Google Scholar
Rosner, B. S., and Goff, W. R. (1967). Electrical responses of the nervous System and subjective scales of intensity. Contributions to Sensory Physiology, 2, 169–221.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwartz, M., Emde, J. W., and Shagass, C. (1964). Comparison of constant current and constant voltage stimulators for scalp-recorded somatosensory responses. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 17, 81–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shagass, C., and Schwartz, M. (1964). Evoked potential studies in Psychiatric patients. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 112, 526–542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spilker, B., and Callaway, E. (1969). ‘Augmenting’ and ‘reducing’ in averaged visual evoked responses to sine wave light. Psychophysiology, 6, 49–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stevens, S. S. (1970). Neural events and the psychophysical law. Science, 170, 1043–1050.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szasz, T. S. (1968). The psychology of persistent pain. A portrait of l'homme douloureux. In Pain, pp. 93–113. Edited by Soulairac, A., Cahn, J., and Charpentier, J., Academic Press: London.Google Scholar
Uttal, W. R., and Cook, L. (1964). Systematics of the evoked somatosensory cortical potential: a psychophysical electrophysiological comparison. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 112, 60–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaughan, H. G. Jr, and Katzman, R. (1964). Evoked response in visual disorders. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 112, 305–319.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walters, A. (1961). Psychogenic regional pain alias hysterical pain. Brain, 84, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilder, J. (1957). The law of initial value in neurology and psychiatry. Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, 125, 73–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williamson, P. D., Goff, W. R., and Allison, T. (1970). Somatosensory evoked responses in patients with unilateral cerebral lesions. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 28, 566–575.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed