Biology and therapy of fibromyalgia. Evidence-based biomarkers for fibromyalgia syndrome

Table 3 Pain pressure thresholds and fibromyalgia (FM): part 2

Reference	Year of Study	Number of FM patients	Number of control individuals	QST	QST method	Findings
Petzke and colleagues [123]	2005	43	28	PPT: CP	ASC and random	FM patients report greater pain intensity but less relative unpleasantness compared with HC
Giesecke and colleagues [124]	2004	16	11 HC, 11 CLBP	PPT: CP	ASC and random	FM and CLBP with decreased PPT
Giesecke and colleagues [125]	2003	97	n/a	PPT: CP	ASC and random	FM subgroups: high and low tenderness. High or low control over pain correlated with cognitive and mood factors
Petzke and colleagues [28]	2003	43	28	PPT: CP, suprathreshold	ASC and random	FM decreased PPT, suprathresholds. Ratings from random method were consistently higher than those of the ASC method, possibly due to perceived lack of perceived control
Petzke and colleagues [24]	2003	39 FM, 6 CWP, 3 regional	28 no pain, 3 pain	PPT: CP and TP	ASC and random	Random method independent of psychological state. ASC correlated more with psychological state
Gracely and colleagues [126]	2002	16	16	PPT: CP	ASC and random	FM with decreased PPT
Chang and colleagues [27]	2000	11 IBS + FM	11 IBS, 10 HC	PPT: TP and CP	ASC and random	In random method, IBS + FM with more decreased PPT than IBS, but not HC. IBS with higher PPT than HC. In ASC, IBS similar PPT to HC
Bendtsen and colleagues [127]	1997	25	25	PPT: TP and CP, suprathreshold	Random	FM with left shift in response function for stimuli applied to tender point (trapezius m) only, no difference in CP compared with HC

ASC, ascending; CLBP, chronic low back pain; CP, control point; CWP, chronic widespread pain; HC, healthy control individuals; IBS, irritable bowel syndrome; PPT, pain pressure thresholds; QST, quantitative sensory testing; TP, tender point.