Table 4 Quality items and quality scoring of studies using pressure pain threshold
1st author, year | Was PPT measured correctly, & was reliability pre-tested? | Was the assessor blinded? | Was there appropriate random number generation & concealment? | Were active & control interventions well described? | Were practitioners appropriate & sufficiently experienced? | Were attempts made to keep participants naïve to study aims? If sham-controlled, were they blinded, & confirmed? | Were study conditions controlled? | Was there control for psychosocial modifiers/ confounders? | Was a sample size calculation performed & met? | Were losses and exclusions reported clearly? | Missing data reported? Imputation method reported & appropriate, if required? | Were estimates & p-values/CIs reported for between-group differences? | Quality score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Casanova-Méndez 2014 [28] | Technique ✔, not pre-tested (0.5) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Were naïve (1) | NR (0) | No (0) | Calculation done & met, NR based on what (0.5) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | 8 |
Coronado 2015 [33] | Technique ✔, not pre-tested (0.5) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Not naïve (0) | NR (0) | No (0) | Calculation done & met, NR based on what (0.5) | Yes (1) | Yes, acceptably imputed (1) | Yes (1) | 8 |
Kardouni 2015 [35] | Technique ✔, pre-testing found reliable (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Blinding confirmed effective (1) | NR (0) | No (0) | Calculation done, NOT met (0) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | 8 |
Bautista-Aguirre 2017 [27] | Technique ✔, not pre-tested (0.5) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Not naïve (0) | NR (0) | No (0) | Calculation done & met (1) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | 7.5 |
Martínez-Segura 2012 [21] | Technique ✔, not pre-tested (0.5) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Not naïve (0) | NR (0) | No (0) | Calculation done & met (1) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | 7.5 |
De Oliveira 2013 [32] | Technique ✔, pre-testing found reliable (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Not naïve (0) | NR (0) | No (0) | Calculation based on subjective pain intensity (0) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | 7 |
Maduro de Camargo 2011 [30] | Technique ✔, not pre-tested (0.5) | Yes (1) | Method NR (0) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Were naïve (1) | NR (0) | No (0) | Calculation done & met (1) | No (0) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | 6.5 |
Packer 2014 [24] | NR if PPT tested × 3, not pre-tested (0) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Blinded, not checked, NR if naïve (0.5) | NR (0) | No (0) | Calculation done & met (1) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | 6.5 |
Salom-Moreno 2014 [31] | Technique ✔, not pre-tested (0.5) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Not naïve (0) | NR (0) | No (0) | Calculation done & met (1) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | 6.5 |
Côté 1994 [25] | NR if PPT tested × 3, not pre-tested (0) | Yes (1) | Concealment method NR (0.5) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Not naïve (0) | NR (0) | No (0) | Calculation done & met (1) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | p-value non-significant, estimates & CIs NR (1) | 5.5 |
Lopez-Lopez 2015 [29] | Technique ✔, not pre-tested (0.5) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | Not naïve (0) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | Calculation based on subjective pain intensity (0) | Yes (1) | NR (0) | No (0) | 5.5 |
Mansilla-Ferragut 2009 [26] | Technique ✔, not pre-tested (0.5) | Yes (1) | Concealment method NR (0.5) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Not blinded, not naïve (0) | NR (0) | No (0) | No calculation (0) | No (0) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | 5 |
Fernández-Carnero 2008 [34] | Technique ✔, not pre-tested (0.5) | Yes (1) | Method NR (0) | Yes (1) | Yes (1) | Not blinded, not naïve (0) | NR (0) | No (0) | No calculation (0) | No (0) | NR (0) | Yes (1) | 4.5 |