Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 6, 2025
Dynamic Quantitative Sensory Testing to Characterize Central Pain Processing
Published on: February 16, 2017
Within-Session Test-Retest Reliability of Pressure Pain Threshold and Mechanical Temporal Summation in Chronic Low
Fábio Carlos Lucas de Oliveira1,2, Camille Cossette1, Catherine Mailloux1
1Centre Interdisciplinaire de Recherche en Réadaptation et Intégration Sociale (Cirris), Université Laval, Quebec.
Objectives:
To determine the absolute and relative within-session test-retest reliability of pressure pain threshold (PPT) and temporal summation of pain (TSP) at the low back and the forearm in individuals with chronic low back pain (CLBP) and to test the impact of different sequences of measurements on reliability metrics.
Materials And Methods:
Twenty-eight adults with CLBP were recruited. Relative (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] and coefficient of variation) and absolute reliability (standard error of measurement and minimal detectable changes) were quantified at 4 sites (back: sacrum and lumbar erector spinae; wrist: hand dorsum and wrist flexors) for PPT and 2 sites (hand and low back) for TSP, for various sequences of measurements.
Results:
Systematic differences were found between within test and retest for most PPT sequences at the lumbar erector spinae site and 1 TSP sequence (1-2-3) at back and hand sites, precluding reliability analyses for these data. Within-session PPT relative reliability was excellent at low back (ICC = 0.83 to 0.94) and wrist (ICC = 0.88 to 0.97) sites, whereas TSP showed good to excellent reliability at hand (ICC = 0.80 to 0.90) and low back (ICC = 0.73 to 0.89). In general, 2 and 3 measurements optimized absolute and relative reliability for TSP and PPT, respectively.
Discussion:
Within-session reliability was generally excellent for PPT and TSP at the low back and hand sites among individuals with CLBP. We recommend using 3 measurements for PPT and 2 for TSP to optimize reliability. Caution is recommended when testing PPT of the painful lower back area since a systematic difference was present between the test and retest.
