Pupil Size Measurement and Sucrose Ingestion for Quantifying and Decreasing Burden of Women during Mammography

Yongbum Lee; Mieko Uchiyama; Tomoko Sumiyoshi

doi:10.4236/jbise.2015.810067

Home > Journals > Biomedical & Life Sciences > JBiSE

JBiSE> Vol.8 No.10, October 2015

Share This Article:

Open Access

Pupil Size Measurement and Sucrose Ingestion for Quantifying and Decreasing Burden of Women during Mammography

Abstract Full-Text HTML XML

Download as PDF (Size:476KB) PP. 700-706

DOI: 10.4236/jbise.2015.810067 4,441 Downloads 4,730 Views Citations

Author(s) Leave a comment

Yongbum Lee^*, Mieko Uchiyama, Tomoko Sumiyoshi

Affiliation(s)

Graduate School of Health Sciences, Niigata University, Niigata, Japan.

ABSTRACT

Many women feel a physical burden, which usually appears as a pain, during mammography. We examined the pain-related pupil dilation response during mammography. Twenty-four healthy women participated in the examination. They were randomly assigned to water group or sucrose group. Water group and sucrose group ingested distilled water and a sucrose solution during mammography, respectively. Their pupil sizes were measured during mammography excluding X-ray irradiation. The subjective intensity of pain during mammography was also assessed using visual analogue scales (VAS). The mean pupil diameter was 2.99 mm in relaxation phase before mammography, while it was 3.15 mm in a few seconds after breast compression (pressure phase). The difference between the two was statistically significant (p < 0.01). There was no correlation between the VAS scores and the pupil sizes. In the pressure phase, the mean pupil sizes of sucrose group and water group were 2.91 mm and 3.42 mm, respectively. The difference between the two reached statistical significance (p < 0.01). These results suggest that we may be able to assess objectively the degree of pain associated with mammography and sweet taste stimuli may be effective to alleviate a women’s burden received during mammography.

KEYWORDS

Mammography, Pain Assessment, Pain Alleviation, Pupil Dilation, Sweet Stimuli

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Cite this paper

Lee, Y. , Uchiyama, M. and Sumiyoshi, T. (2015) Pupil Size Measurement and Sucrose Ingestion for Quantifying and Decreasing Burden of Women during Mammography. Journal of Biomedical Science and Engineering, 8, 700-706. doi: 10.4236/jbise.2015.810067.

References

[1]	Drukker, B.H. (1997) Breast Disease: A Primer on Diagnosis and Management. International Journal of Fertility and Women’s Medicine, 42, 278-287.

[2]	Kerlikowske, K., Grady, D., Rubin, S.M., Sandrock, C. and Ernster, V.L. (1995) Efficacy of Screening Mammography. A Meta-Analysis. Journal of the American Medical Association, 273, 149-154. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.1995.03520260071035

[3]	Jackson, V.P., Lex, A.M. and Smith, D.J. (1988) Patient Discomfort during Screen-Film Mammography. Radiology, 168, 421-423. http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiology.168.2.3393659

[4]	Aro, A.R., Absetz-Ylostalo, P., Eerola, T., Pamilo, M. and Lonnqvist, J. (1996) Pain and Discomfort during Mammography. European Journal of Cancer, 32, 1674-1679. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0959-8049(96)00140-2

[5]	Keemers-Gels, M.E., Groenendijk, R.P., Van Den Heuvel, J.H., Boetes, C., Peer, P.G. and Wobbes, T.H. (2000) Pain Experienced by Women Attending Breast Cancer Screening. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 60, 235-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1006457520996

[6]	Hafslund, B. (2000) Mammography and the Experience of Pain and Anxiety. Radiography, 6, 269-272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/radi.2000.0281

[7]	Sharp, P.C., Michielutte, R., Freimanis, R., Cunningham, L., Spangler, J. and Burnette, V. (2003) Reported Pain Following Mammography Screening. Archives of Internal Medicine, 163, 833-836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archinte.163.7.833

[8]	Asghari, A. and Nicholas, M.K. (2004) Pain during Mam-mography: The Role of Coping Strategies. Pain, 108, 170-179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2003.12.022

[9]	Davey, B. (2007) Pain during Mammography: Possible Risk Factors and Ways to Alleviate Pain. Radiography, 13, 229-234. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2006.03.001

[10]	Haus, A.G. (2002) Historical Technical Developments in Mammography. Technology in Cancer Research and Treatment, 1, 119-126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/153303460200100204

[11]	Ng, K.H., Jamal, N. and DeWerd, L. (2006) Global Quality Control Perspective for the Physical and Technical Aspects of Screen-Film Mammography—Image Quality and Radiation Dose. Radiation Protection Dosimetry, 121, 445-451. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/rpd/ncl051

[12]	Robson, K.J. (2010) Advances in Mammographic Imaging. British Journal of Radiology, 83, 273-275. http://dx.doi.org/10.1259/bjr/97865299

[13]	Yamada, T. (2010) Current Status and Issues of Screening Digital Mam-mography in Japan. Breast Cancer, 17, 163- 168. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12282-009-0191-z

[14]	Keel, K.D. (1948) The Pain Chart. The Lancet, 2, 6-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(48)91787-5

[15]	Turk, D.C. and Melzack. R. (2001) Handbook of Pain Assessment. 2nd Edition, The Guilford Press, New York.

[16]	Merzack, R. (1975) The McGill Pain Questionnaire: Major Properties and Scoring Methods. Pain, 1, 277-299. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0304-3959(75)90044-5

[17]	Uchiyama, M., Lee, Y., Sadakata, M., Sayama, M. and Tsai, D.Y. (2012) Measurement of Muscle Activities for Evaluating Physical Burden and Pain during Mammography Positioning. Tohoku Journal of Experimental Medicine, 228, 53-58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1620/tjem.228.53

[18]	Uchiyama, M., Lee, Y., Sadakata, M., Tsai, D.Y. and Sayama, M. (2015) Quantification of the Pain and Physical Burden Experienced during Po-sitioning for Craniocaudal Imaging in Mammography, Evaluated by Measurement of Muscle Activity. Health, 7, 23-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/health.2015.71004

[19]	Uchiyama, M., Lee, Y., Sadakata, M., Kazama, K., Minagawa, Y. and Tsurumaki, M. (2013) Effects of Mammography Positioning on the Autonomic Nervous Function. Health, 5, 1335-1341. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/health.2013.58181

[20]	Tabar, L., Lebovic, G.S., Hermann, G.D., Kaufman, C.S., Alexander, C. and Sayre, J. (2004) Clinical Assessment of a Radiolucent Cushion for Mammography. Acta Radiologica, 45, 154-158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02841850410003978

[21]	Markle, L., Roux, S. and Sayre, J.W. (2004) Reduction of Discomfort during Mammography Utilizing a Radiolucent Cushioning Pad. Breast Journal, 10, 345-349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1075-122X.2004.21352.x

[22]	Kornguth, P.J., Rimer, B.K., Conaway, M.R., Sullivan, D.C., Catoe, K.E., Stout, A.L. and Brackett, J.S. (1993) Impact of Patient-Controlled Compression on the Mammography Experience. Radiology, 186, 99-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1148/radiology.186.1.8416595

[23]	Lee, Y. and Uchiyama, M. (2015) The Effect of Humorous Stimuli on Alleviating Pain during Mammography: A Preliminary Study. Health, 7, 659-664. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/health.2015.76078

[24]	Oka, S., Chapman, C.R., Kim, B., Nakajima, I., Shimizu, O. and Oi, Y. (2007) Pupil Dilation Response to Noxious Stimulation: Effect of Varying Nitrous Oxide Concentration. Clinical Neuro-physiology, 118, 2016-2024. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2007.04.023

[25]	Chapman, C.R., Oka, S., Bradshaw, D.H., Jacobson, R.C. and Donaldson, G.W. (1999) Phasic Pupil Dilation Response to Noxious Stimulation in Normal Vol-unteers: Relationship to Brain Evoked Potentials and Pain Report. Psychophysiology, 36, 44-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0048577299970373

[26]	Bhattacharjee, M. and Mathur R. (2005) Antinociceptive Effect of Sucrose Ingestion in the Human. Indian Journal of Physiology Pharmacology, 49, 383-394.

[27]	Kakeda, T. (2010) Potential of Sucrose-Induced Analgesia to Relieve Pain in Male Adults: A Preliminary Study. Japan Journal of Nursing Science, 7, 169-173.