s300

PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF CHRONIC BACK PAIN AND Poster 31 TEMPOROMANDIBULAR PAIN PATIENTS. GREY Th-Fri M.M. Schuqens*, P.F. Schlottke and H. Flor, Dept. of Clincal and Physiological Psychology, University of TUbingen, F.R.G.

Exhibit Hall Abs No 571

AIM OF INVESTIGATION: Although psychophysiological processes have been repeatedly implicated in the maintenance of chronic pain syndromes, there are few conclus- ive research results. The purpose of this study was the investigation of psychophysiolog- ical characteristics of patients suffering from either chronic back pain (CBP) or temporo- mandibular pain and dysfunction (TMPDS). Adequate methodology was one of the major object- ives in this study. METHODS: Twenty CBP patients, 20 TMPD patients, and 20 matched controls participated in a

ps-siological experiment during which surface EMGs from several muscles, heart rate and skin conductance levels were recorded. The tasks included a resting baseline, neutral and stressful imagery, EMG-discrimination and EMG-control, and the anticipation and per- formance of potentially painful movements. Results were evaluated by ANOVAs and single case analyses.

RESULTS: Both, TMPD and CBP patients displayed symptom-specific EMG increases at the site ovuring stressful imagery. Both patient groups also showed lower EMG-discriminab- ility, higher anticipatory anxiety as well as more pronounced increases in pain and tension ratings during the movement task than the healthy controls. CONCLUSION: The relevance of these psychophysiological characteristics for treatment

selection and treatment evaluation is discussed.

Supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft.

NEW ITALIAN ADAPTION AND STANDARDIZATION OF THE MCGILL PAIN QUESTIONNAIRE Poster 32 S. Ferracuti, G. Romeo*2, M.G. Leardi*, G. Cruccu, R. Lazzari*2, Depart- GREY Th-Fri ments of Neurological Science and 2Psychology, Universita di Roma "La Sapienza", Roma 00185, Italy

Exhibit Hall Abs No 572

AIM OF THE INVESTIGATION: This study has attempted a new Italian adaptation and standardization of the MPQ on a population of 150 patients. Prior to this an item analysis has been conducted, rearranging some of the items in a new order scale, in the attempt to reconcile the meaning of the original adjectives with the usual way of ex- pressing pain by Italian patients, and trying to preserve much as possible the original se- quence of adjectives in the test. METHODS: 20 patients with pain and 8 year of education were used to select a sample of

pain descriptors; the original division in 4 major subclasses was mantained and the number of adjectives was left unchanged. A second group of 100 subjects pain-free (20 university graduates, 50 with 13 y. of education and 30 with 8 y. of education) was asked to attribute a value to each descriptor on a 5 point scale. Values were distributed by education weighting the values given by each patient taking into account their education. The test was then sublitted to 150 patients divided in 4 diagnostic groups: 1) Headache, 2) Low-back pain, 3) Myofascial pain, 4) Neurogenic pain. RESULTS: The groups were significantly differentiated from each other with a P 0.001 in

four sensorial subclasses (spatial, punctate pressure, traction pressure, thermal) and two affective subclasses (tension and punishment). The PRI-S index was the most sensitive index in differentiating neurogenic and low-back pain from headache and myofascial pain. CONCLUSION: This preliminary investigation shows the validity of this version of the MPQ

in discriminate between different kinds of pain. Further work is necessary to develop and standardize a fully adeguate Italian form of the MPQ prior to generalized clinical use.