-
Archives of Physical Medicine and... May 2022To evaluate the effectiveness of mirror therapy (MT) for phantom limb pain (PLP). (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the effectiveness of mirror therapy (MT) for phantom limb pain (PLP).
DATA SOURCES
PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, CNKI, and WanFang Data were used to search for studies published up to March 31, 2021.
STUDY SELECTION
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the pain intensity of MT for PLP were performed. A total of 2094 articles were found. Among them, 10 were eligible for the final analysis.
DATA EXTRACTION
The quality of the RCTs was assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale by 2 independent reviewers. Outcome data were pooled according to follow-up intervals (1, 3, 6, and 12mo). Duration times were used as a basis for distinguishing subgroups. The primary evaluation was by visual analog scale. The PEDro scale was used to assess the methodological quality of studies.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Meta-analysis revealed a statistically significant decrease in pain in the MT group vs the control group within 1 month (I=0%; standardized mean difference [SMD]=-0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.79 to -0.13; P = .007). The patients with pain for longer than 1 year benefited more from MT (I=0%; SMD=-0.46; 95% CI, -0.85 to -0.07; P = .02).
CONCLUSIONS
MT has beneficial effects for patients with PLP in the short-term, as evidenced by their improved pain scores. There was no evidence that MT had a long-term effect, but that may be a product of limited data. For patients with long-term PLP, MT may be an effective treatment.
Topics: Humans; Mirror Movement Therapy; Pain Measurement; Phantom Limb; Physical Therapy Modalities; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34461084
DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2021.07.810 -
Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience 2022To evaluate the literature on the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR)- and augmented reality (AR)-based treatments for phantom limb pain (PLP) in postamputation or... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the literature on the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR)- and augmented reality (AR)-based treatments for phantom limb pain (PLP) in postamputation or brachial plexus avulsion (BPA) populations.
METHODS
Multiple databases were queried in July 2021 with the keywords "virtual reality," "augmented reality," and "phantom limb pain." Included studies utilized VR or AR to treat PLP with outcome measurement. Two independent reviewers assessed methodological quality using the Physiotherapy Evidence Databsae (PEDro) Scale and the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies (MINORS) scoring. Studies were separated into immersive and nonimmersive AR/VR systems, with further categorization according to the specific methodologies used.
RESULTS
Of 110 results from the database queries, 20 publications met the inclusion criteria. There was one unblinded, randomized, control trial (RCT), one single-blinded, randomized, crossover trial (RCxT), three comparative case series, 13 noncomparative case series, and two case reports. Seven of the 20 studies were classified as nonimmersive. Six studies reported decreased PLP after AR/VR treatments, of which four reported significant reductions. One study reported a reduction in PLP with no significant difference from control conditions. Thirteen of the 20 studies were classified as immersive AR/VR. Twelve studies reported decreased PLP after AR/VR treatments, of which eight reported significant reductions. One study found no change in PLP, compared to baseline.
CONCLUSION
The number of studies using AR/VR in PLP treatment has expanded since a 2017 review on the topic. The majority of these studies offer support for the efficacy of treating PLP with AR/VR-based treatments. Research has expanded on the customization, outcome measurements, and statistical analysis of AR/VR treatments. While results are promising, most publications remain at the case series level, and clinical indications should be cautioned. With improvements in the quality of evidence, there remain avenues for further investigations, including increased sampling, randomization, optimization of treatment duration, and comparisons to alternative therapies.
PubMed: 36591552
DOI: No ID Found -
Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation... Sep 2016Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a major problem after limb amputation. Mirror therapy (MT) is a non-pharmacological treatment using representations of movement, the efficacy... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a major problem after limb amputation. Mirror therapy (MT) is a non-pharmacological treatment using representations of movement, the efficacy of which in reducing PLP remains to be clarified. Here, we present the first systematic review on MT efficacy in PLP and phantom limb movement (PLM) in amputees (lower or upper limb).
METHODS
A search on Medline, Cochrane Database and Embase, crossing the keywords "Phantom Limb" and "Mirror Therapy" found studies which were read and analyzed according the PRISMA statement.
RESULTS
Twenty studies were selected, 12 on the subject of MT and PLP, 3 on MT and PLM, 5 on MT and both (PLP and PLM). Among these 20 studies, 5 were randomized controlled trials (163 patients), 6 prospective studies (55 patients), 9 case studies (40 patients) and methodologies were heterogeneous. Seventeen of the 18 studies reported the efficacy of MT on PLP, but with low levels of evidence. One randomized controlled trial did not show any significant effect of MT. As to the effect of MT on PLM, the 8 studies concerned reported effectiveness of MT: 4 with a low level of evidence and 4 with a high level of evidence. An alternative to visual illusion seems to be tactile or auditory stimulation.
CONCLUSION
We cannot recommend MT as a first intention treatment in PLP. The level of evidence is insufficient. Further research is needed to assess the effect of MT on pain, prosthesis use, and body representation, and to standardize protocols.
Topics: Adult; Amputees; Female; Humans; Imagery, Psychotherapy; Male; Middle Aged; Pain Management; Phantom Limb; Physical Therapy Modalities; Psychomotor Performance
PubMed: 27256539
DOI: 10.1016/j.rehab.2016.04.001 -
Prosthetics and Orthotics International Jun 2018Phantom limb pain is reported in 50%-85% of people with amputation. Clinical interventions in treating central pain, such as mirror therapy, motor imagery, or virtual... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
BACKGROUND
Phantom limb pain is reported in 50%-85% of people with amputation. Clinical interventions in treating central pain, such as mirror therapy, motor imagery, or virtual visual feedback, could redound in benefits to amputee patients with phantom limb pain.
OBJECTIVES
To provide an overview of the effectiveness of different techniques for treating phantom limb pain in amputee patients.
STUDY DESIGN
Systematic review.
METHODS
A computerized literature search up to April 2017 was performed using the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, CINAHL, MEDLINE, ProQuest, PEDro, EBSCOhost, and Cochrane Plus. Methodological quality and internal validity score of each study were assessed using PEDro scale. For data synthesis, qualitative methods from the Cochrane Back Review Group were applied.
RESULTS
In all, 12 studies met our inclusion criteria, where 9 were rated as low methodological quality and 3 rated moderate quality. All studies showed a significant reduction in pain, but there was heterogeneity among subjects and methodologies and any high-quality clinical trial (PEDro score ≤8; internal validity score ≤5) was not found.
CONCLUSION
Mirror therapy, motor imaginary, and virtual visual feedback reduce phantom limb pain; however, there is limited scientific evidence supporting their effectiveness. Future studies should include designs with more solid research methods, exploring short- and long-term benefits of these therapies. Clinical relevance This systematic review investigates the effectiveness of mirror therapy, motor imagery, and virtual visual feedback on phantom limb pain, summarizing the currently published trials and evaluating the research quality. Although these interventions have positive benefits in phantom limb pain, there is still a lack of evidence for supporting their effectiveness.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Amputees; Artificial Limbs; Feedback; Female; Humans; Imagery, Psychotherapy; Male; Pain Management; Pain Measurement; Phantom Limb; Prosthesis Fitting; Quality of Life; Treatment Outcome; Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy
PubMed: 29153043
DOI: 10.1177/0309364617740230 -
PloS One 2020Phantom limb pain (PLP)-pain felt in the amputated limb-is often accompanied by significant suffering. Estimates of the burden of PLP have provided conflicting data. To... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Phantom limb pain (PLP)-pain felt in the amputated limb-is often accompanied by significant suffering. Estimates of the burden of PLP have provided conflicting data. To obtain a robust estimate of the burden of PLP, we gathered and critically appraised the literature on the prevalence and risk factors associated with PLP in people with limb amputations.
METHODS
Articles published between 1980 and July 2019 were identified through a systematic search of the following electronic databases: MEDLINE/PubMed, PsycINFO, PsycArticles, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Africa-Wide Information, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Academic Search Premier. Grey literature was searched on databases for preprints. Two reviewers independently conducted the screening of articles, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. The meta-analyses were conducted using the random effects model. A statistically significant level for the analyses was set at p<0.05.
RESULTS
The pooling of all studies demonstrated a prevalence estimate of 64% [95% CI: 60.01-68.05] with high heterogeneity [I2 = 95.95% (95% CI: 95.10-96.60)]. The prevalence of PLP was significantly lower in developing countries compared to developed countries [53.98% vs 66.55%; p = 0.03]. Persistent pre-operative pain, proximal site of amputation, stump pain, lower limb amputation and phantom sensations were identified as risk factors for PLP.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review and meta-analysis estimates that six of every 10 people with an amputation report PLP-a high and important prevalence of PLP. Healthcare professionals ought to be aware of the high rates of PLP and implement strategies to reduce PLP by addressing known risk factors, specifically those identified by the current study.
Topics: Amputation, Surgical; Clinical Decision-Making; Humans; Phantom Limb; Prevalence; Risk Factors
PubMed: 33052924
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240431 -
BMJ Military Health Apr 2022Amputations result from trauma, war, conflict, vascular diseases and cancer. Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a potentially debilitating form of chronic pain affecting around... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Amputations result from trauma, war, conflict, vascular diseases and cancer. Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a potentially debilitating form of chronic pain affecting around 100 million amputees across the world. Mirror therapy and virtual reality (VR) are two commonly used treatments, and we evaluated their respective success rates.
METHODS
A meta-analysis and systematic review was undertaken to investigate mirror therapy and VR in their ability to reduce pain levels. A mean difference (MD) model to compare group pain levels pretreatment and post-treatment via aggregating these results from numerous similar studies was employed. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan (V.5.4) and expressed in MD for visual analogue scale (VAS) score.
RESULTS
A total of 15 studies met our search criteria; they consisted of eight mirror therapy with 214 participants and seven VR including 86 participants, totalling 300 participants. Mean age ranged from 36 to 63 years, 77% male, of which 61% were lower body amputees. Both led to a VAS reduction (mirror therapy mean reduction VAS score was 2.54, 95% CI 1.42 to 3.66; p<0.001; VR 2.24, 95% CI 1.28 to 3.20; p<0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in pain alleviation between mirror therapy and VR (p=0.69).
CONCLUSIONS
Mirror therapy and VR are both equally efficacious in alleviating PLP, but neither is more effective than the other. However, due to small sample size and limited number of studies, factors such as gender, cause of amputation, site of limb loss or length of time from amputation, which may influence treatment success, could not be explored.
Topics: Adult; Amputees; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Mirror Movement Therapy; Phantom Limb; Virtual Reality; Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy
PubMed: 35042760
DOI: 10.1136/bmjmilitary-2021-002018 -
Clinical Rehabilitation Dec 2021This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of mirror therapy on phantom limb sensation and phantom limb pain in amputees. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of mirror therapy on phantom limb sensation and phantom limb pain in amputees.
DATA SOURCES
Nine electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycInfo, PreQuest, PEDro) were searched from their inception to May 10th, 2021.
METHODS
Two authors independently selected relevant studies and extracted the data. The effect sizes were calculated under a random-effects model meta-analysis, and heterogeneity was assessed using the test. The risk of bias was evaluated by the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the methodological quality was appraised by the PEDro scale. The GRADE approach was applied to assess the confidence of the effect.
RESULTS
A total of 11 RCTs involving 491 participants were included in this review and nine RCTs involving 372 participants were included in meta-analysis. The quality of these studies was from poor to good with scores ranging from 2 to 8 points according to PEDro scale. The pooled SMD showed that mirror therapy reduced the pain with a large effect size (-0.81; 95% CI = -1.36 to -0.25; = 0.005; = 82%; = 372) compared with other methods (four covered mirror, one phantom exercise, three mental visualization, one sensorimotor exercise, one transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, one tactile stimuli). The quality of evidence for the outcome pain intensity was determined to be fair according to GRADE approach.
CONCLUSION
There is fair-quality evidence that MT is beneficial for reducing phantom limb pain.
Topics: Amputees; Humans; Phantom Limb; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sensation; Transcutaneous Electric Nerve Stimulation
PubMed: 34308686
DOI: 10.1177/02692155211027332 -
European Journal of Pain (London,... Jan 2023Phantom limb pain (PLP) concerns >50% of amputees and has a negative impact on their rehabilitation, mental health and quality of life. Mirror therapy (MT) is a... (Review)
Review
Effect of mirror therapy in the treatment of phantom limb pain in amputees: A systematic review of randomized placebo-controlled trials does not find any evidence of efficacy.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE
Phantom limb pain (PLP) concerns >50% of amputees and has a negative impact on their rehabilitation, mental health and quality of life. Mirror therapy (MT) is a promising strategy, but its effectiveness remains controversial. We performed a systematic review to: (i) evaluate the effectiveness of MT versus placebo in reducing PLP, and (ii) determine MT effect on disability and quality of life.
DATABASES AND DATA TREATMENT
We selected randomized-controlled trials in five databases (Medline, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PEDro and Embase) that included patients with unilateral lower or upper limb amputation and PLP and that compared the effects on PLP of MT versus a placebo technique. The primary outcome was PLP intensity changes and the secondary outcomes were PLP duration, frequency, patients' disability and quality of life.
RESULTS
Among the five studies included, only one reported a significant difference between the MT group and control group, with a positive MT effect at week 4. Only one study assessed MT effect on disability and found a significant improvement in the MT group at week 10 and month 6.
CONCLUSIONS
Our systematic review did not allow concluding that MT reduces PLP and disability in amputees. This lack of strong evidence is probably due to (i) the low methodological quality of the included studies, and (ii) the lack of statistical power. Future trials should include a higher number of patients, increase the number and frequency of MT sessions, have a long-term follow-up and improve the methodological quality.
SIGNIFICANCE
Recent meta-analyses concluded that MT is effective for reducing phantom limb pain. Conversely, the present systematic review that included only studies with the best level of evidence did not find any evidence about its effectiveness for this condition. We identified many ways to improve future randomized-controlled trials on this topic: increasing the number of participants, reducing the intra-group heterogeneity, using a suitable placebo and intensifying the MT sessions and frequency.
Topics: Humans; Phantom Limb; Quality of Life; Mirror Movement Therapy; Amputees; Pain Management; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36094758
DOI: 10.1002/ejp.2035 -
The British Journal of Surgery Sep 2017Pain present for at least 3 months after a surgical procedure is considered chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) and affects 10-50 per cent of patients. Interventions for... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pain present for at least 3 months after a surgical procedure is considered chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) and affects 10-50 per cent of patients. Interventions for CPSP may focus on the underlying condition that indicated surgery, the aetiology of new-onset pain or be multifactorial in recognition of the diverse causes of this pain. The aim of this systematic review was to identify RCTs of interventions for the management of CPSP, and synthesize data across treatment type to estimate their effectiveness and safety.
METHODS
MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were searched from inception to March 2016. Trials of pain interventions received by patients at 3 months or more after surgery were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool.
RESULTS
Some 66 trials with data from 3149 participants were included. Most trials included patients with chronic pain after spinal surgery (25 trials) or phantom limb pain (21 trials). Interventions were predominantly pharmacological, including antiepileptics, capsaicin, epidural steroid injections, local anaesthetic, neurotoxins, N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonists and opioids. Other interventions included acupuncture, exercise, postamputation limb liner, spinal cord stimulation, further surgery, laser therapy, magnetic stimulation, mindfulness-based stress reduction, mirror therapy and sensory discrimination training. Opportunities for meta-analysis were limited by heterogeneity. For all interventions, there was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on effectiveness.
CONCLUSION
There is a need for more evidence about interventions for CPSP. High-quality trials of multimodal interventions matched to pain characteristics are needed to provide robust evidence to guide management of CPSP.
Topics: Acupuncture Therapy; Behavior Therapy; Chronic Pain; Combined Modality Therapy; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Laser Therapy; Pain, Postoperative; Spinal Cord Stimulation
PubMed: 28681962
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10601 -
Therapeutic Advances in Chronic Disease 2022To evaluate the effectiveness of any form of physiotherapy intervention for the management of central neuropathic pain (cNeP) due to any underlying cause.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of any form of physiotherapy intervention for the management of central neuropathic pain (cNeP) due to any underlying cause.
METHODS
Multiple databases were searched from inception until August 2021. Randomised controlled trials evaluating physiotherapy interventions compared to a control condition on pain among people with cNeP were included. Methodological quality and the quality of evidence were assessed using the Physiotherapy Evidence Database Scale and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool, respectively.
RESULTS
The searches yielded 2661 studies, of which 23 randomised controlled trials met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analyses. Meta-analyses of trials examining non-invasive neurostimulation revealed significant reductions in pain severity due to spinal cord injury (SCI; standardised mean difference (SMD): -0.59 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.07, -0.11), = 0.02) and phantom limb pain (weighted mean difference (WMD): -1.57 (95% CI: -2.85, -0.29), = 0.02). The pooled analyses of trials utilising acupuncture, transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), and mirror therapy showed significant reductions in pain severity among individuals with stroke (WMD: -1.46 (95% CI: -1.97, -0.94), < 0.001), multiple sclerosis (SMD: -0.32 (95% CI: -0.57, -0.06), = 0.01), and phantom limb pain (SMD: -0.74 (95% CI: -1.36, -0.11), = 0.02), respectively. Exercise was also found to significantly reduce pain among people with multiple sclerosis (SMD: -1.58 (95% CI: -2.85, -0.30), = 0.02).
CONCLUSION
Evidence supports the use of non-invasive neurostimulation for the treatment of pain secondary to SCI and phantom limb pain. Beneficial pain management outcomes were also identified for acupuncture in stroke, TENS in multiple sclerosis, and mirror therapy in phantom limb pain.
PubMed: 35356293
DOI: 10.1177/20406223221078672