-
Health Technology Assessment... Nov 2018Although many treatments exist for phantom limb pain (PLP), the evidence supporting them is limited and there are no guidelines for PLP management. Brain and spinal cord...
BACKGROUND
Although many treatments exist for phantom limb pain (PLP), the evidence supporting them is limited and there are no guidelines for PLP management. Brain and spinal cord neurostimulation therapies are targeted at patients with chronic PLP but have yet to be systematically reviewed.
OBJECTIVE
To determine which types of brain and spinal stimulation therapy appear to be the best for treating chronic PLP.
DESIGN
Systematic reviews of effectiveness and epidemiology studies, and a survey of NHS practice.
POPULATION
All patients with PLP.
INTERVENTIONS
Invasive interventions - deep brain stimulation (DBS), motor cortex stimulation (MCS), spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and dorsal root ganglion (DRG) stimulation. Non-invasive interventions - repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) and transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Phantom limb pain and quality of life.
DATA SOURCES
Twelve databases (including MEDLINE and EMBASE) and clinical trial registries were searched in May 2017, with no date limits applied.
REVIEW METHODS
Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts and full texts. Data extraction and quality assessments were undertaken by one reviewer and checked by another. A questionnaire was distributed to clinicians via established e-mail lists of two relevant clinical societies. All results were presented narratively with accompanying tables.
RESULTS
Seven randomised controlled trials (RCTs), 30 non-comparative group studies, 18 case reports and 21 epidemiology studies were included. Results from a good-quality RCT suggested short-term benefits of rTMS in reducing PLP, but not in reducing anxiety or depression. Small randomised trials of tDCS suggested the possibility of modest, short-term reductions in PLP. No RCTs of invasive therapies were identified. Results from small, non-comparative group studies suggested that, although many patients benefited from short-term pain reduction, far fewer maintained their benefits. Most studies had important methodological or reporting limitations and few studies reported quality-of-life data. The evidence on prognostic factors for the development of chronic PLP from the longitudinal studies also had important limitations. The results from these studies suggested that pre-amputation pain and early PLP intensity are good predictors of chronic PLP. Results from the cross-sectional studies suggested that the proportion of patients with severe chronic PLP is between around 30% and 40% of the chronic PLP population, and that around one-quarter of chronic PLP patients find their PLP to be either moderately or severely limiting or bothersome. There were 37 responses to the questionnaire distributed to clinicians. SCS and DRG stimulation are frequently used in the NHS but the prevalence of use of DBS and MCS was low. Most responders considered SCS and DRG stimulation to be at least sometimes effective. Neurosurgeons had mixed views on DBS, but most considered MCS to rarely be effective. Most clinicians thought that a randomised trial design could be successfully used to study neurostimulation therapies.
LIMITATION
There was a lack of robust research studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Currently available studies of the efficacy, effectiveness and safety of neurostimulation treatments do not provide robust, reliable results. Therefore, it is uncertain which treatments are best for chronic PLP.
FUTURE WORK
Randomised crossover trials, randomised N-of-1 trials and prospective registry trials are viable study designs for future research.
STUDY REGISTRATION
The study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017065387.
FUNDING
The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Topics: Clinical Trials as Topic; Deep Brain Stimulation; Electric Stimulation Therapy; Humans; Pain Management; Phantom Limb; Quality of Life; Spinal Cord Stimulation; Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation
PubMed: 30407905
DOI: 10.3310/hta22620 -
Archives of Rehabilitation Research and... Jun 2019This systematic review aims to evaluate current literature for the prevalence, causes, and effect of low back pain (LBP) in traumatic lower limb amputees, specifically... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review aims to evaluate current literature for the prevalence, causes, and effect of low back pain (LBP) in traumatic lower limb amputees, specifically its association with the kinematics and kinetics of the lumbar spine and lower extremities.
DATA SOURCES
Databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, PsycINFO) were searched systematically for eligible studies from inception to January 2018.
STUDY SELECTION
The inclusion terms were synonyms of , , and , whereas studies involving nontraumatic amputee populations, single cases, or reviews were excluded. 1822 studies were initially identified, of which 44 progressed to full-text reading, and 11 studies were included in the review.
DATA EXTRACTION
Two independent reviewers reviewed the included studies, which were evaluated using a quality assessment tool and the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system for risk of bias, prior to analyzing results and conclusions.
DATA SYNTHESIS
There was an LBP prevalence of 52%-64% in traumatic amputees, compared to 48%-77% in the general amputee population (predominantly vascular, tumor, trauma), attributed to a mixture of biomechanical, psychosocial, and personal factors. These factors determined the presence, frequency, and severity of the pain in the amputees, significantly affecting their quality of life. However, little evidence was available on causality.
CONCLUSION
The high prevalence of LBP in traumatic amputees highlights the necessity to advance research into the underlying mechanics behind LBP, specifically the spinal kinematics and kinetics. This may facilitate improvements in rehabilitation, with the potential to improve quality of life in traumatic amputees.
PubMed: 33543047
DOI: 10.1016/j.arrct.2019.100007 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Nov 2018To investigate causes, diagnostics and treatment modalities for persistent socket pain (PSP) after enucleation and evisceration.
PURPOSE
To investigate causes, diagnostics and treatment modalities for persistent socket pain (PSP) after enucleation and evisceration.
METHODS
A systematic search was undertaken in accordance with the PRISMA Statement, in PubMed, Embase.com and Thomson Reuters/Web of Science. We searched for relevant papers until the 28th of July 2016. Inclusion criteria were (1) patients with a history of enucleation or evisceration, (2) PSP, (3) report of the cause and/or used diagnostics and/or treatment modality, (4) full text in English, Dutch or Spanish language. Excluded were (1) review articles, (2) comments, and publications concerning, (3) nonhumans, (4) exenterated patients, (5) acute postoperative pain, or (6) periorbital pain without pain in the socket. Given the lack of high quality evidence from randomized controlled trials, we examined all available evidence from primary observational studies and assessed quality within this lower level of evidence.
RESULTS
A total of 32 studies were included. Causes of PSP found were prosthesis-related (n = 5), dry socket (n = 2), trochleitis (n = 3), compression of the trigeminal nerve (n = 2), implant-related (n = unknown), inflammation (n = 5), surgery-related (n = 4), neuromas (n = 8), malignant tumours (n = 3), psychiatric/psychosocial (n = 2), phantom pain (n = 149), rarer entities (n = 3) or unknown (n = 14). Nonsurgical treatments suffice for conditions as trochleitis, prosthesis-related pain, dry socket and for phantom pain. Other causes of pain may require more invasive treatments such as implant removal.
CONCLUSION
Careful history and examination can give some direction in the diagnostic procedure; however, PSP is probably multifactorial and the specific origin(s) may remain uncertain. Implant replacement can be an effective treatment. Studies to identifiy less invasive procedures are required.
Topics: Eye Diseases; Eye Enucleation; Eye Evisceration; Eye Pain; Humans; Orbital Diseases; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 29633581
DOI: 10.1111/aos.13688 -
Biomedicines Oct 2022Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) has been utilized for over 50 years with accumulating evidence of efficacy in a variety of chronic pain conditions. The level and... (Review)
Review
Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) has been utilized for over 50 years with accumulating evidence of efficacy in a variety of chronic pain conditions. The level and strength of evidence supporting the use of PNS for peripheral neuropathic pain remains unclear. The purpose of this review is to synthesize data from prospective studies on the efficacy of PNS for neuropathic pain as it pertains to pain intensity, neurological deficits/neuropathy (e.g., weakness, sensory deficits, gait/balance), and other secondary outcomes (quality of life, satisfaction, emotional functioning, and adverse events). In compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, this review identified articles from MEDLINE(R), EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Scopus. Overall, per the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria, pooled results demonstrate very low quality or low quality of evidence supporting modest to substantial improvement in pain and neurological function after PNS implantation for treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain. PNS for phantom limb pain was the only indication that had moderate level evidence. Future prospective and well-powered studies are warranted to assess the efficacy of PNS for peripheral neuropathic pain.
PubMed: 36289867
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10102606 -
BMC Neurology Feb 2024We previously performed a systematic review and meta-analysis which revealed a Phantom Limb Pain (PLP) prevalence estimate of 64% [95% CI: 60.01-68.1]. The prevalence... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
We previously performed a systematic review and meta-analysis which revealed a Phantom Limb Pain (PLP) prevalence estimate of 64% [95% CI: 60.01-68.1]. The prevalence estimates varied significantly between developed and developing countries. Remarkably, there is limited evidence on the prevalence of PLP and associated risk factors in African populations.
METHODS
Adults who had undergone limb amputations between January 2018 and October 2022 were recruited from healthcare facilities in the Western and Eastern Cape Provinces. We excluded individuals with auditory or speech impairments that hindered clear communication via telephone. Data on the prevalence and risk factors for PLP were collected telephonically from consenting and eligible participants. The prevalence of PLP was expressed as a percentage with a 95% confidence interval. The associations between PLP and risk factors for PLP were tested using univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses. The strength of association was calculated using the Odds Ratio where association was confirmed.
RESULTS
The overall PLP prevalence was 71.73% [95% CI: 65.45-77.46]. Persistent pre-operative pain, residual limb pain, and non-painful phantom limb sensations were identified as risk factors for PLP.
CONCLUSION
This study revealed a high prevalence of PLP. The use of effective treatments targeting pre-amputation pain may yield more effective and targeted pre-amputation care, leading to improved quality of life after amputation.
Topics: Humans; Cross-Sectional Studies; Phantom Limb; Prevalence; Quality of Life; Risk Factors
PubMed: 38321380
DOI: 10.1186/s12883-024-03547-w -
The Journal of Pain Feb 2016Relatively new evidence suggests that movement representation techniques (ie, therapies that use the observation and/or imagination of normal pain-free movements, such... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
UNLABELLED
Relatively new evidence suggests that movement representation techniques (ie, therapies that use the observation and/or imagination of normal pain-free movements, such as mirror therapy, motor imagery, or movement and/or action observation) might be effective in reduction of some types of limb pain. To summarize the evidence regarding the efficacy of those techniques, a systematic review with meta-analysis was performed. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED, PsychINFO, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, and OT-seeker up to August 2014 and hand-searched further relevant resources for randomized controlled trials that studied the efficacy of movement representation techniques in reduction of limb pain. The outcomes of interest were pain, disability, and quality of life. Study selection and data extraction were performed by 2 reviewers independently. We included 15 trials on the effects of mirror therapy, (graded) motor imagery, and action observation in patients with complex regional pain syndrome, phantom limb pain, poststroke pain, and nonpathological (acute) pain. Overall, movement representation techniques were found to be effective in reduction of pain (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -.82, 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.32 to -.31, P = .001) and disability (SMD = .72, 95% CI, .22-1.22, P = .004) and showed a positive but nonsignificant effect on quality of life (SMD = 2.61, 85% CI, -3.32 to 8.54, P = .39). Especially mirror therapy and graded motor imagery should be considered for the treatment of patients with complex regional pain syndrome. Furthermore, the results indicate that motor imagery could be considered as a potential effective treatment in patients with acute pain after trauma and surgery. To date, there is no evidence for a pain reducing effect of movement representation techniques in patients with phantom limb pain and poststroke pain other than complex regional pain syndrome.
PERSPECTIVE
In this systematic review we synthesize the evidence for the efficacy of movement representation techniques (ie, motor imagery, mirror therapy, or action observation) for treatment of limb pain. Our findings suggest effective pain reduction in some types of limb pain. Further research should address specific questions on the optimal type and dose of therapy.
Topics: Extremities; Humans; Imagination; Motor Activity; Neurological Rehabilitation; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Pain Management
PubMed: 26552501
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2015.10.015 -
Neural Regeneration Research Jan 2022Phantom limb pain is a chronic pain syndrome that is difficult to cope with. Despite neurostimulation treatment is indicated for refractory neuropathic pain, there is...
Phantom limb pain is a chronic pain syndrome that is difficult to cope with. Despite neurostimulation treatment is indicated for refractory neuropathic pain, there is scant evidence from randomized controlled trials to recommend it as the treatment choice. Thus, a systematic review was performed to analyze the efficacy of central nervous system stimulation therapies as a strategy for pain management in patients with phantom limb pain. A literature search for studies conducted between 1970 and September 2020 was carried out using the MEDLINE and Embase databases. Principles of The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline were followed. There were a total of 10 full-text articles retrieved and included in this review. Deep brain stimulation, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcranial direct current stimulation, and motor cortex stimulation were the treatment strategies used in the selected clinical trials. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct current stimulation were effective therapies to reduce pain perception, as well as to relieve anxiety and depression symptoms in phantom limb pain patients. Conversely, invasive approaches were considered the last treatment option as evidence in deep brain stimulation and motor cortex stimulation suggests that the value of phantom limb pain treatment remains controversial. However, the findings on use of these treatment strategies in other forms of neuropathic pain suggest that these invasive approaches could be a potential option for phantom limb pain patients.
PubMed: 34100428
DOI: 10.4103/1673-5374.314288 -
Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) Oct 2022(1) Background: Patients diagnosed with chronic pain suffer from long-term pain, which negatively affects their daily lives and mental health. Virtual reality (VR)... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Patients diagnosed with chronic pain suffer from long-term pain, which negatively affects their daily lives and mental health. Virtual reality (VR) technologies are considered a therapeutic tool to manage pain perception and mental health conditions. This systematic review aimed to appraise the efficacy of VR in improving pain intensity, anxiety, depression and mood among patients with chronic pain; (2) Methods: Five electronic databases were systematically searched using the terms representing VR and chronic pain. Quality assessment was conducted using Cochrane Collaboration's tool and Newcastle-Ottawa scale; (3) Results: Seventeen peer-reviewed articles were included in this review. It was found that VR was able to reduce pain intensity in patients with phantom limb pain, chronic headache, chronic neck pain and chronic low-back pain. The effects of VR on the improvement of anxiety, depression and mood were not determined due to the inadequate amount of clinical evidence; (4) Conclusions: VR, especially immersive VR, improves pain outcomes and its effects may vary depending on the approach and study design. More research is still needed to investigate the clinical use of VR in patients with chronic pain.
PubMed: 36292493
DOI: 10.3390/healthcare10102047 -
Journal of Personalized Medicine Apr 2022Autologous fillet flaps are a common reconstructive option for large defects after forequarter amputation (FQA) due to advanced local malignancy or trauma. The inclusion... (Review)
Review
Autologous fillet flaps are a common reconstructive option for large defects after forequarter amputation (FQA) due to advanced local malignancy or trauma. The inclusion of osseous structures into these has several advantages. This article therefore systematically reviews reconstructive options after FQA, using osteomusculocutaneous fillet flaps, with emphasis on personalized surgical technique and outcome. Additionally, we report on a case with an alternative surgical technique, which included targeted muscle reinnervation (TMR) of the flap. Our literature search was conducted in the PubMed and Cochrane databases. Studies that were identified were thoroughly scrutinized with regard to relevance, resulting in the inclusion of four studies (10 cases). FQA was predominantly a consequence of local malignancy. For vascular supply, the brachial artery was predominantly anastomosed to the subclavian artery and the brachial or cephalic vein to the subclavian or external jugular vein. Furthermore, we report on a case of a large osteosarcoma of the humerus. Extended FQA required the use of the forearm for defect coverage and shoulder contour reconstruction. Moreover, we performed TMR. Follow-up showed a satisfactory result and no phantom limb pain. In case of the need for free flap reconstruction after FQA, this review demonstrates the safety and advantage of osteomusculocutaneous fillet flaps. If the inclusion of the elbow joint into the flap is not possible, we recommend the use of the forearm, as described. Additionally, we advocate for the additional implementation of TMR, as it can be performed quickly and is likely to reduce phantom limb and neuroma pain.
PubMed: 35455676
DOI: 10.3390/jpm12040560 -
Disability and Rehabilitation Dec 2019The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effect of virtual representation of body parts on pain perception in patients with pain and in pain-free...
The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effect of virtual representation of body parts on pain perception in patients with pain and in pain-free participants exposed to experimentally induced pain. Databases searched: Medline, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and Web of Science. Studies investigating participants with clinical pain or those who were pain free and exposed to experimentally induced pain were analysed separately. Eighteen clinical studies and seven experimental studies were included. Randomised controlled clinical trials showed no significant difference between intervention and control groups for pain intensity. Clinical studies with a single group pretest-posttest design showed a reduction in pain after intervention. In the studies including a sample of pain free participants exposed to experimentally induced pain there was an increase in pain threshold when the virtual arm was collocated with the real arm, when it moved in synchrony with the real arm, and when the colour of the stimulated part of the virtual arm became blue. Observing a virtual arm covered with iron armour reduced pain. The use of virtual representations of body parts to reduce pain is promising. However, due to the poor methodological quality and limitations of primary studies, we could not find conclusive evidence.Implications for rehabilitationVirtual reality has been increasingly used in the rehabilitation of painful and dysfunctional limbs.Virtual reality can be used to distract attention away from acute pain and may also provide corrective psychological and physiological environments.Virtual representation of body parts has been used to provide a corrective re-embodiment of painful dysmorphic body parts, and primary research shows promising results.
Topics: Complex Regional Pain Syndromes; Humans; Neuralgia; Phantom Limb; Physical Therapy Modalities; Virtual Reality
PubMed: 30182760
DOI: 10.1080/09638288.2018.1485183