Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-g4j75 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T05:10:03.091Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phasic pupil dilation response to noxious stimulation in normal volunteers: Relationship to brain evoked potentials and pain report

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 1999

C. RICHARD CHAPMAN ,
SHUNICHI OKA ,
DAVID H. BRADSHAW ,
ROBERT C. JACOBSON  and
GARY W. DONALDSON
C. RICHARD CHAPMAN
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, USA Pain and Toxicity Research Program, Division of Clinical Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA
SHUNICHI OKA
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
DAVID H. BRADSHAW
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
ROBERT C. JACOBSON
Affiliation:
Department of Anesthesiology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
GARY W. DONALDSON
Affiliation:
Pain and Toxicity Research Program, Division of Clinical Research, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA, USA Department of Statistics, University of Washington, Seattle, USA
Get access

Abstract

Pupillary response to noxious stimulation was investigated in men (n = 11) and women (n = 9). Subjects experienced repeated trials of noxious electrical fingertip stimulation at four intensities, ranging from faint to barely tolerable pain. Measures included pupil dilation response (PDR), pain report (PR), and brain evoked potentials (EPs). The PDR began at 0.33 s and peaked at 1.25 s after the stimulus. Multivariate mixed-effects analyses revealed that (a) the PDR increased significantly in peak amplitude as stimulus intensity increased, (b) EP peaks at 150 and 250 ms differed significantly in both amplitude and latency across stimulus intensity, and (c) PR increased significantly with increasing stimulus intensity. Men demonstrated a significantly greater EP peak amplitude and peak latency at 150 ms than did women. With sex and stimulus intensity effects partialled out, the EP peak latency at 150 ms significantly predicted PR, and EP peak amplitude at 150 ms significantly predicted the PDR peak amplitude.

Keywords

PupillometryPainEvoked potentialsSex differencesSympathetic arousal
Type
Research Article
Information
Psychophysiology , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , January 1999 , pp. 44 - 52
Copyright
1999 Society for Psychophysiological Research

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.)