4.1 Article

Modifying quantitative sensory testing to investigate behavioral reactivity in a pediatric global developmental delay sample: Relation to peripheral innervation and chronic pain outcomes

Journal

DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOBIOLOGY
Volume 64, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/dev.22329

Keywords

developmental delay; pain; peripheral innervation; sensory

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [HD44763, HD73126]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The early tactile and nociceptive mechanisms in children with global developmental delay at risk for intellectual and developmental disability are not well understood. This study found that children with chronic pain had higher epidermal nerve fiber density compared to those without chronic pain. The findings support the feasibility of using an integrative biobehavioral approach to assess nociceptive and tactile peripheral innervation and behavioral reactivity in a high-risk sample.
Early tactile and nociceptive (pain) mechanisms in children with global developmental delay at risk for intellectual and developmental disability are not well understood. Sixteen children with global developmental delay (mean age = 5.1 years, SD = 1.4; 50% male) completed a modified quantitative sensory testing (mQST) protocol, an epidermal (skin) punch biopsy procedure, and parent-endorsed measures of pain. Children with reported chronic pain had significantly greater epidermal nerve fiber density (ENFd) compared to children without chronic pain. Based on the mQST trials, ENFd values were associated with increased vocal reactivity overall and specifically during the light touch and cool thermal stimulus trials. The findings support the feasibility of an integrative biobehavioral approach to test nociceptive and tactile peripheral innervation and behavioral reactivity during a standardized sensory test in a high-risk sample for which there is often sensory dysfunction and adaptive behavior impairments.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available