4.5 Article

Cognitive and sensorimotor function in participants being treated for trigeminal neuralgia pain

期刊

JOURNAL OF HEADACHE AND PAIN
卷 21, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s10194-020-01156-9

关键词

Trigeminal neuralgia; Pain medication; Sensorimotor; Cognitive; Impairment

资金

  1. Trigeminal Neuralgia Association UK (TNA UK) [114326]
  2. Department of Health's NIHR Biomedical Research Centre
  3. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) infrastructure at Leeds

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Trigeminal neuralgia (TN) is an orofacial condition defined by reoccurring, spontaneous, short-lived but excruciating stabbing pain. Pharmacological interventions constitute the first-line treatment for TN, with antiepileptic drugs commonly prescribed. People treated for TN pain with antiepileptic drugs describe cognitive and motor difficulties affecting activities of daily living, and report poorer quality of life. We undertook the first comprehensive objective evaluation of sensorimotor and cognitive performance in participants being treated for TN pain with antiepileptic drugs relative to age-matched controls. Methods Participants (43 TN, 41 control) completed a battery of sensorimotor (steering, aiming and tracking) and cognitive (working memory, processing speed, inhibition) tasks. Results The TN group performed significantly worse than controls on the sensorimotor tracking and aiming tasks and across all cognitive measures. Conclusions The data explain why patients treated with antiepileptic drugs report impairment when conducting activities of daily living (given the need for cognitive and motor capability within most of these). The study is an important first step in: (i) ensuring there is adequate information on the impact of pharmacological treatment; (ii) identifying measures to determine optimal medication dosage and track change over time; (iii) creating an evidence base that could allow scientific justification of alternative pain treatment options for TN (e.g. the costs/benefits of surgery).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据