Megan McPhee

Dr. Megan McPhee

Center for Neuroplasticity and Pain (CNAP), Aalborg University, Denmark
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

11Years (2016-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 November 2019 in Pain
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Megan McPheeMegan McPhee
Megan McPhee
HVHenrik Bjarke Vaegter
Henrik Bjarke Vaegter
TGThomas Graven-Nielsen
Thomas Graven-Nielsen
Altered pronociceptive and antinociceptive mechanisms are often implicated in painful conditions and have been increasingly studied over the past decade. For some painful conditions, alterations are well-established, but in populations with low back pain (LBP), there remains considerable debate whether these mechanisms are altered. The present systematic review aimed to address this issue by identifying studies assessing conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and/or temporal summation of pain (TSP) in patients with LBP, comparing with either a healthy control group or using a method with reference data available. Qualitative synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis of group differences were performed. For CPM and TSP, 20 and 29 original articles were eligible, with data for meta-analysis obtainable from 18 (1500 patients and 505 controls) and 27 (1507 patients and 1127 controls) studies, respectively. Most studies were of poor-to-fair quality with significant heterogeneity in study size, population, assessment methodology, and outcome. Nonetheless, CPM was impaired in patients with LBP compared with controls (standardized mean difference = −0.44 [−0.64 to −0.23], P < 0.001), and the magnitude of this impairment was related to pain chronicity (acute/recurrent vs chronic, P = 0.003), duration (R S = −0.62, P = 0.006), and severity (R S = −0.54, P = 0.02). Temporal summation of pain was facilitated in patients with LBP compared with controls (standardized mean difference = 0.50 [0.29-0.72], P < 0.001), and the magnitude of this facilitation was weakly related to pain severity (R S= 0.41, P = 0.04) and appeared to be influenced by test modality (P < 0.001). Impaired CPM and facilitated TSP were present in patients with LBP compared with controls, although the magnitude of differences was small which may direct future research on the clinical utility.

17 December 2021 in Journal of Clinical Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ISIngrid Schuttert
Ingrid Schuttert
HTHans Timmerman
Hans Timmerman
KPKristian K. Petersen
Kristian K. Petersen
Megan McPheeMegan McPhee
Megan McPhee
LALars Arendt-Nielsen
Lars Arendt-Nielsen
AWAndré P. Wolff
André P. Wolff
Central sensitisation is assumed to be one of the underlying mechanisms for chronic low back pain. Because central sensitisation is not directly assessable in humans, the term ‘human assumed central sensitisation’ (HACS) is suggested. The objectives were to investigate what definitions for HACS have been used, to evaluate the methods to assess HACS, to assess the validity of those methods, and to estimate the prevalence of HACS. Database search resulted in 34 included studies. Forty different definition references were used to define HACS. This review uncovered twenty quantitative methods to assess HACS, including four questionnaires and sixteen quantitative sensory testing measures. The prevalence of HACS in patients with chronic low back pain was estimated in three studies. The current systematic review highlights that multiple definitions, assessment methods, and prevalence estimates are stated in the literature regarding HACS in patients with chronic low back pain. Most of the assessment methods of HACS are not validated but have been tested for reliability and repeatability. Given the lack of a gold standard to assess HACS, an initial grading system is proposed to standardize clinical and research assessments of HACS in patients with a chronic low back.

1 April 2016 in Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DMDavid MacDonald
David MacDonald
AWAlan Wan
Alan Wan
Megan McPheeMegan McPhee
Megan McPhee
KTKylie Tucker
Kylie Tucker
FHFrançois Hug
François Hug

1 June 2019 in Current Opinion in Supportive & Palliative Care
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
KPKristian K. Petersen
Kristian K. Petersen
Megan McPheeMegan McPhee
Megan McPhee
MHMorten S. Hoegh
Morten S. Hoegh
TGThomas Graven-Nielsen
Thomas Graven-Nielsen
Purpose of review: The purpose of this review is to summarize recent findings on conditioned pain modulation (CPM) in humans with a focus on methodology, factors modulating CPM, and the potential for CPM as a clinical marker for pain progression. Recent findings: CPM can be evoked by combining different stimulus modalities with good reliability; sequential CPM effects are stable over time with limited carryover effects. Optimism and pain catastrophizing might influence pain inhibition. Further, studies suggest that the CPM effect can be improved by gabapentinoids, transcranial direct current stimulation to cortical structures, and exercise and that long-term opioid use might impair CPM in patients with chronic pain. Clinical evidence suggests that preoperative impaired CPM may predict more severe chronic postoperative pain. The effect of pain duration on CPM impairment has been challenged by recent studies. Summary: As CPM methodology is optimized, studies are revealing factors that can modulate descending pain inhibitory pathways. Understanding underlying mechanisms of CPM will improve the utility of CPM in a clinical setting and potentially lead to personalized treatments for chronic pain patients.

12 December 2017 in Emergency Medicine Australasia
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
KSKirsten Strudwick
Kirsten Strudwick
Megan McPheeMegan McPhee
Megan McPhee
ABAnthony Bell
Anthony Bell
MMMelinda Martin‐Khan
Melinda Martin‐Khan
TRTrevor Russell
Trevor Russell