• Matteo Castaldo, Lars Arendt-Nielsen, Marta Ponzano, Francesca Bovis, Paola Torelli, Cinzia Finocchi, and Stefano Di Antonio.
• Department of Health Science and Technology, Center for Pain and Neuroplasticity (CNAP), SMI, School of Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
• Eur J Pain. 2025 Feb 1; 29 (2): e4787e4787.

AimIdentify values that could predict the presence of increased pressure-pain sensitivity independent of the migraine cycle through a single assessment.MethodsThis was a secondary analysis of a previous study in which 198 episodic and chronic migraine patients were assessed during all phases of the migraine cycle. Pressure pain threshold (PPT) was assessed over the temporalis, cervical spine, hand, and leg. Migraine patients were divided into two sub-groups: patients with increased pressure-pain sensitivity (IPS) and with No IPS (No-IPS). A Chi-squared Automatic Interaction Detection decision tree analysis was used to identify predictors to be included in the IPS or NoIPS group. To assess the internal validity of the model, a tenfold cross-validation was applied.Results161 (81%) patients were included in the IPS group, while 37 (19%) in the NoIPS group. Migraine patients with: (1) Temporalis PPT ≤ 130 kPa; (2) Temporalis PPT > 130 kPa and ≤ 197.5 kPa and hand PPT ≤ 347.33 kPa; (3) Temporalis PPT > 197.5 kPa and hand PPT ≤ 315 kPa; were correctly included in the IPS group with a sensitivity of 96%, a specificity of 81%, a positive predictive value of 96%, and a negative predictive value of 81%. The accuracy of the model and the cross-validation analysis were respectively 93% and 92%.ConclusionThe high internal validity suggests that our model could precisely predict the presence of IPS independently by the phase in which the assessment occurred. Trigeminal and hand PPT cut-off values could be used to identify patients with IPS.© 2025 The Author(s). European Journal of Pain published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Pain Federation ‐ EFIC ®.

19 keywords...

hide…