Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011:2011:692102.
doi: 10.1155/2011/692102. Epub 2011 Nov 3.

Bedside testing for chronic pelvic pain: discriminating visceral from somatic pain

Affiliations

Bedside testing for chronic pelvic pain: discriminating visceral from somatic pain

John Jarrell et al. Pain Res Treat. 2011.

Abstract

Objectives. This study was done to evaluate three bedside tests in discriminating visceral pain from somatic pain among women with chronic pelvic pain. Study Design. The study was an exploratory cross-sectional evaluation of 81 women with chronic pelvic pain of 6 or more months' duration. Tests included abdominal cutaneous allodynia (aCA), perineal cutaneous allodynia (pCA), abdominal and perineal myofascial trigger points (aMFTP) and (pMFTP), and reduced pain thresholds (RPTs). Results. Eighty-one women were recruited, and all women provided informed consent. There were 62 women with apparent visceral pain and 19 with apparent somatic sources of pain. The positive predictive values for pelvic visceral disease were aCA-93%, pCA-91%, aMFTP-93%, pMFTP-81%, and RPT-79%. The likelihood ratio (+) and 95% C.I. for the detection of visceral sources of pain were aCA-4.19 (1.46, 12.0), pCA-2.91 (1.19, 7.11), aMTRP-4.19 (1.46, 12.0), pMFTP-1.35 (0.86, 2.13), and RPT-1.14 (0.85, 1.52), respectively. Conclusions. Tests of cutaneous allodynia, myofascial trigger points, and reduced pain thresholds are easily applied and well tolerated. The tests for cutaneous allodynia appear to have the greatest likelihood of identifying a visceral source of pain compared to somatic sources of pain.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. ACOG practice bulletin no. 51. chronic pelvic pain. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2004;103(3):589–605. - PubMed
    1. Peters AA, Van DE, Jellis B, Van ZE, Hermans J, Trimbos JB. A randomized clinical trial to compare two different approaches in women with chronic pelvic pain. Obstetrics and Gynecology. 1991;77(5):740–744. - PubMed
    1. Jarrell JF, Vilos GA, Allaire C, et al. Consensus guidelines for the management of chronic pelvic pain. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada. 2005;27(8):781–826. - PubMed
    1. Craig KD, Versloot J, Goubert L, Vervoort T, Crombez G. Perceiving pain in others: automatic and controlled mechanisms. Journal of Pain. 2010;11(2):101–108. - PubMed
    1. Goubert L, Craig KD, Vervoort T, et al. Facing others in pain: the effects of empathy. Pain. 2005;118(3):285–288. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources