Elsevier

Clinical Neurophysiology

Volume 126, Issue 10, October 2015, Pages 1979-1987
Clinical Neurophysiology

The effect of sleep restriction on laser evoked potentials, thermal sensory and pain thresholds and suprathreshold pain in healthy subjects

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2014.12.011Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Randomized blinded study on the effects of sleep restriction on laser evoked potentials (LEP) amplitude, LEP-habituation, pain threshold and suprathreshold pain in healthy subjects.

  • Sleep restriction reduced LEP-amplitudes and thenar cold pain thresholds.

  • The results suggest that the observed hyperalgesia after sleep restriction might be caused by cognitive or perceptual mechanisms, rather than sensory amplification.

Abstract

Objective

Sleep restriction seems to change our experience of pain and reduce laser evoked potential (LEP) amplitudes. However, although LEP-habituation abnormalities have been described in painful conditions with comorbid sleep impairment, no study has previously measured the effect of sleep restriction on LEP-habituation, pain thresholds, and suprathreshold pain.

Method

Sixteen males and seventeen females (aged 18–31 years) were randomly assigned to either two nights of delayed bedtime and four hours sleep (partial sleep deprivation) or nine hours sleep. The study subjects slept at home, and the sleep was measured with actigraphy both nights and polysomnography the last night. LEP, thermal thresholds and suprathreshold pain ratings were obtained the day before and the day after intervention. The investigator was blinded. ANOVA was used to evaluate the interaction between sleep restriction and day for each pain-related variable.

Results

LEP-amplitude decreased after sleep restriction (interaction p = 0.02) compared to subjects randomized to nine hours sleep. LEP-habituation was similar in both groups. Thenar cold pain threshold decreased after sleep restriction (interaction p = 0.009). Supra-threshold heat pain rating increased temporarily 10 s after stimulus onset after sleep restriction (interaction p = 0.01), while it did not change after nine hours sleep.

Conclusion

Sleep restriction reduced the CNS response to pain, while some of the subjective pain measures indicated hyperalgesia.

Significance

Since LEP-amplitude is known to reflect both CNS-pain-specific processing and cognitive attentive processing, our results suggest that hyperalgesia after sleep restriction might partly be caused by a reduction in cortical cognitive or perceptual mechanisms, rather than sensory amplification.

Introduction

Although a nociceptive effect of sleep restriction was demonstrated in an experimental study as early as 1934 (Cooperman et al., 1934), there are still uncertainties about the nature of this relationship (Azevedo et al., 2011, Haack and Mullington, 2005, Kundermann et al., 2008, Kundermann et al., 2004, Onen et al., 2001, Roehrs et al., 2006, Schuh-Hofer et al., 2013, Smith et al., 2007, Smith et al., 2005, Tiede et al., 2010). From previous studies it seems that sleep restriction enhances our subjective experience of pain, including reduced pain thresholds, but reduce the brain’s reaction to pain as demonstrated by laser evoked potential (LEP) amplitudes (Azevedo et al., 2011, Tiede et al., 2010).

However, because these studies have considerable methodological variations, e.g. regarding the type of sleep restriction, it is difficult to explain the neurophysiological mechanism behind this apparently contradictory observation. By extending the LEP- and pain thresholds protocol with paradigms reflecting responses to prolonged pain, i.e. also measuring LEP-habituation and temporal summation of suprathreshold heat pain, we might detect sleep restriction-typical patterns. Such patterns might shed more light on the physiology behind the effects of sleep restriction on pain.

Suprathreshold pain paradigms may reflect temporal summation of pain, and give information about central mechanisms of pain hypersensitivity (Granot et al., 2006). Only a few studies have evaluated the effect of sleep restriction on suprathreshold pain and with varying methods, e.g. to a fixed-intensity laser stimulus (Azevedo et al., 2011, Tiede et al., 2010), as pain score to a cold-pressor conditioning stimulus (Smith et al., 2007), as a heat pain tolerance threshold (Onen et al., 2001) or as a pain score to consecutive pin-pricks for wind-up evaluation (Schuh-Hofer et al., 2013). Generally, results suggest that sleep restriction also might cause suprathreshold hyperalgesia. Since generalized (multi-site) hyperalgesia often suggest central mechanisms of pain hypersensitivity, we used two sites (cephalic and upper extremity) for suprathreshold and for pain threshold determination.

Since habituation is a physiological mechanism that protects individuals from responding to repeated stimuli of moderate magnitude and low significance (Coppola et al., 2013), it is interesting that abnormally decreased LEP-habituation has been described in several painful conditions like migraine (Di Clemente et al., 2013, Valeriani et al., 2003) and fibromyalgia (de Tommaso et al., 2014). Furthermore, as epidemiological studies indicate that there is a causal relationship between insomnia and several painful disorders (Boardman et al., 2006, Canivet et al., 2008, Gupta et al., 2007, Hoogendoorn et al., 2001, Kaila-Kangas et al., 2006, Lyngberg et al., 2005, Odegard et al., 2011, Siivola et al., 2004), it would be interesting to find out whether these two observations are related or not. Specifically, if lack of sleep in healthy individuals result in LEP-habituation abnormalities, it might indicate that sleep loss could be the explanatory mechanism for the observed decreased LEP-habituation in migraine and fibromyalgia. As far as we know, no previous study has investigated the effect of sleep restriction on LEP-amplitude habituation.

As we aimed to compare psychophysical pain thresholds with pain-related CNS-responses, most specifically elicited with laser-induced skin heating, the thermal modality was deemed most suitable. This approach is in line with recent interest in more naturalistic sleep restriction-protocols (Finan et al., 2013). As such, a main aim was to investigate how two nights with sleep restriction affected LEP-amplitude and LEP-habituation. A second major aim was to study how sleep restriction affected thermal pain thresholds and suprathreshold heat pain responses. Thermal detection thresholds were also included as control variables to check for unspecific effects of sleep restriction on the somatosensory system, e.g. related to alertness or attention. Hence, it was also a third general aim to compare several variables, reflecting different aspects of thermal pain and sensory physiology, to explore possible sleep restriction-specific abnormality-patterns.

Section snippets

Study participants

Study participants were recruited through intranet advertisement within our Hospital and University. The study participants were ⩾18 years old, free of migraine or frequent (⩾3 days/month) tension type headache and otherwise healthy (except mild asthma and allergies). Subjects using drugs that could affect neurological, vascular or muscular function, having any history of alcohol or drug abuse, being pregnant or breastfeeding were not included.

From the 80 subjects who responded to the study

Characteristics of the study subjects

There were no group differences regarding gender, age, height, BMI, insomnia, sleep length, breathing difficulty, sleepiness or sleep quality (Table 1).

The effect of sleep restriction on sleep-variables

Subjects randomized to four hours sleep slept on average 3.9 h per night during the study, while subjects randomized to nine hours sleep slept on average 7.4 h per night (Table 1). Tiredness after the final test was increased in the four hours group (Table 1). None of the study subjects had an AHI ⩾5, and there was no difference in mean AHI or

Discussion

In this neurophysiological study on healthy young adults, sleep restriction was associated with decreased N2P2-amplitude, while no change in amplitude was observed in the group randomized to nine hours sleep. It should be noted that there was a significant difference in N2P2-amplitude between the four hours sleep group and the nine hours sleep at baseline as well. Since subjects were randomized, the group difference at baseline is interpreted as a random difference. Importantly, the differences

Acknowledgements

The authors are most grateful to the subjects of the present study for their participation. Conflict of interests: None.

References (55)

  • K. Kaida et al.

    Validation of the Karolinska sleepiness scale against performance and EEG variables

    Clin Neurophysiol

    (2006)
  • V. Legrain et al.

    Attentional modulation of the nociceptive processing into the human brain: selective spatial attention, probability of stimulus occurrence, and target detection effects on laser evoked potentials

    Pain

    (2002)
  • J. Lorenz et al.

    Contribution of attentional and cognitive factors to laser evoked brain potentials

    Neurophysiol Clin

    (2003)
  • S. Schuh-Hofer et al.

    One night of total sleep deprivation promotes a state of generalized hyperalgesia: a surrogate pain model to study the relationship of insomnia and pain

    Pain

    (2013)
  • M.T. Smith et al.

    How do sleep disturbance and chronic pain inter-relate? Insights from the longitudinal and cognitive-behavioral clinical trials literature

    Sleep Med Rev

    (2004)
  • W. Tiede et al.

    Sleep restriction attenuates amplitudes and attentional modulation of pain-related evoked potentials, but augments pain ratings in healthy volunteers

    Pain

    (2010)
  • M. Valeriani et al.

    Reduced habituation to experimental pain in migraine patients: a CO(2) laser evoked potential study

    Pain

    (2003)
  • T. Akerstedt et al.

    Disturbed sleep in shift workers, day workers, and insomniacs

    Chronobiol Int

    (2008)
  • American Academy of Sleep Medicine

    Sleep-related breathing disorders in adults: recommendations for syndrome definition and measurement techniques in clinical research. The report of an American Academy of Sleep Medicine task force

    Sleep

    (1999)
  • U. Baumgartner et al.

    Laser-evoked potentials are graded and somatotopically organized anteroposteriorly in the operculoinsular cortex of anesthetized monkeys

    J Neurophysiol

    (2006)
  • K.K. Beiske et al.

    Reliability and validity of a Norwegian version of the Epworth sleepiness scale

    Sleep Breath

    (2009)
  • H.F. Boardman et al.

    The natural history of headache: predictors of onset and recovery

    Cephalalgia

    (2006)
  • C. Canivet et al.

    Sleeping problems as a risk factor for subsequent musculoskeletal pain and the role of job strain: results from a one-year follow-up of the Malmo Shoulder Neck Study Cohort

    Int J Behav Med

    (2008)
  • J.K. Chan et al.

    The acute effects of alcohol on sleep architecture in late adolescence

    Alcohol Clin Exp Res

    (2013)
  • N.R. Cooperman et al.

    Studies on the physiology of sleep: XI. Further observations on the effects of prolonged sleeplessness

    Am J Physiol

    (1934)
  • G. Coppola et al.

    Habituation and sensitization in primary headaches

    J Headache Pain

    (2013)
  • M. de Tommaso et al.

    Update on laser-evoked potential findings in fibromyalgia patients in light of clinical and skin biopsy features

    J Neurol

    (2014)
  • Cited by (39)

    • The differential effects of sleep deprivation on pain perception in individuals with or without chronic pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis

      2022, Sleep Medicine Reviews
      Citation Excerpt :

      The methodological quality of the included RCTs and randomized crossover studies are summarized in Figs. S1a and S1b. Six of the seven included RCTs had high risk of bias [35,41,43,45,51,53], and one had moderate risk of bias [39]. The included randomized crossover trials had high (n = 6) [12,13,46,48,50,55] and moderate (n = 5) [16,37,38,44,52] risk of bias.

    • Is low intensity exercise sufficient to induce exercise-induced pain threshold modulation in people with persistent pain?

      2022, Musculoskeletal Science and Practice
      Citation Excerpt :

      Further, heightened psychological distress, such as pain catastrophising, stress, anxiety or depression potentially influences EIH, although evidence for this is inconclusive (Munneke et al., 2020). Poor sleep quality may influence EIH as sleep disruption reduces pain thresholds and pain inhibition (Ødegård et al., 2015; Simpson et al., 2018; Smith et al., 2007) and by extension may impair EIH; however, limited data prevents firm conclusions (Travers et al., 2018), and further investigation is warranted. This study aimed to: (1) investigate whether a 12-min walk test (12MWT) was sufficient to yield exercise-induced pain threshold modulation (EIPM) within two cohorts with persistent pain; (2) compare exercise-induced responses between these two cohorts (tertiary vs. community); (3) investigate whether baseline self-report measures (pain severity, pain distribution, psychological distress, sleep) and baseline pain sensitivity differed between EIPM response categories following the 12MWT.

    • Mechanisms and Pathways of Pain Photobiomodulation: A Narrative Review

      2021, Journal of Pain
      Citation Excerpt :

      Aberrant light exposure at night causes disruptions in the circadian rhythm by modulation of the melatonin signaling system which ultimately disrupts sleep.7 These disruptions in the diurnal sleep schedule have been shown to increase pain perception, as seen in night-shift workers.52,71,80,86,97 Although the mechanism has not been fully elucidated, there are some animal studies that might provide a mechanistic explanation.

    • A systematic review and meta-analysis of behavioral sleep interventions for adolescents and emerging adults

      2020, Sleep Medicine Reviews
      Citation Excerpt :

      One of the trials included naps in the protocol for the sleep restriction group [33], and inconsistency or omission in the reports of recovery sleep after intervention. Overall, it was feasible for both adolescents and emerging adults to follow the sleep restriction protocol (>80%) [21,30–34]. The sleep restriction interventions had a negative effect on positive and negative mood [31], preservation of slow wave sleep, and memory consolidation in recovery sleep [34]; they also led to a poorer working memory, executive function, and sustained attention [21], and more subjective sleepiness despite naps [33].

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text