neuropathic vs. neuroplastic

Since all kind of pain is, according to the neuroscience, rooted and generated by the brain and the nervous system, it is not unreasonable, in a wide sense, to consider any pain as NEUROLOGICAL.
So, the key is to accurately differentiate between the two forms of (neurological) pain: neuropathic or neuroplastic.
The neuropathic pain is related to illness, injury, pathology or tissue damage and requires a medical treatment
whereas...
the neuroplastic pain (aka TMS, MBS, PPD, ...) is related to congnitive and/or emotional issues and demands a psychological approach (instead of pills, physiotherapy, steroid injections, surgery,...BEWARE!)

Does it make sense?
M.

 

Short answer: Yep!

Longer answer, and I'm sure you already know this, @mbo, so it's really for the benefit of our newer members: is that neuropathic pain can become neuroplastic pain after (sometimes long after) the healing of the injury or illness has been achieved, for purely psychological/emotional reasons.

 

Well said !
I append and guess:
acute pain is mainly (but not only) neuropathic
whereas
chronic/persistent/repetitive pain is mainly (but not only) neuroplastic.

 

AND.... sometimes (frequently?) neuroplastic pain begins from scratch, without a previous acute/neuropathic pain

and in certain cases neuropathic pain overlaps with neuroplastic pain: that's the "perfect storm", the extreme confusion.

I guess, of course.
M

 

And... the more you try to define it and find discrete categories, the harder it gets.

We are, after all, talking about the human brain.

 

Great observation! In my opinion, those who have had a precipitating injury have a much harder time accepting TMS diagnosis, and it is often hard to convince them that our bodies have self-repairing capabilities and chronic pain is in most cases neuroplastic.