Open Access

Claudia Horn‐Hofmann, Lena Jablonowski, Melanie Madden, Miriam Kunz, Stefan Lautenbacher

• Background Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is an experimental paradigm, which describes the inhibition of responses to a noxious or strong-innocuous stimulus, the test stimulus (TS), by the additional application of a second noxious or strong-innocuous stimulus, the conditioning stimulus (CS). As inadequate CPM efficiency has been assumed to be predisposing for clinical pain, the search for moderating factors explaining inter-individual variations in CPM is ongoing. Psychological factors have received credits in this context. However, research concerning associations between CPM and trait factors relating to negative emotions has yielded disappointing results. Yet, the influence of anxious or fearful states on CPM has not attracted much interest despite ample evidence that negative affective states enhance pain. Our study aimed at investigating the effect of fear induction by symbolic threat on CPM. Methods Thirty-seven healthy participants completed two experimental blocks: oneBackground Conditioned pain modulation (CPM) is an experimental paradigm, which describes the inhibition of responses to a noxious or strong-innocuous stimulus, the test stimulus (TS), by the additional application of a second noxious or strong-innocuous stimulus, the conditioning stimulus (CS). As inadequate CPM efficiency has been assumed to be predisposing for clinical pain, the search for moderating factors explaining inter-individual variations in CPM is ongoing. Psychological factors have received credits in this context. However, research concerning associations between CPM and trait factors relating to negative emotions has yielded disappointing results. Yet, the influence of anxious or fearful states on CPM has not attracted much interest despite ample evidence that negative affective states enhance pain. Our study aimed at investigating the effect of fear induction by symbolic threat on CPM. Methods Thirty-seven healthy participants completed two experimental blocks: one presenting aversive pictures showing burn wounds (high-threat block) and one presenting neutral pictures (low-threat block). Both blocks contained a CPM paradigm with contact heat as TS and hot water as CS; subjective numerical ratings as well as contact-heat evoked potentials (CHEPs) were assessed. Results We detected an overall inhibitory CPM effect for CHEPs amplitudes but not for pain ratings. However, we found no evidence for a modulation of CPM by threat despite threat ratings indicating that our manipulation was successful. Discussion These results suggest that heat/thermal CPM is resistant to this specific type of symbolic threat induction and further research is necessary to examine whether it is resistant to fearful states in general. Significance The attempt of modulating heat conditioned pain modulation (CPM) by emotional threat (fear/anxiety state) failed. Thus, heat CPM inhibition again appeared resistant to emotional influences. Pain-related brain potentials proved to be more sensitive for CPM effects than subjective ratings.…