Poster 314 Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Severity Score: Development of A Clinical Tool For Monitoring Disease Evolution

PM&R ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. S281-S281
Author(s):  
Anjum Sayyad ◽  
Joseph R. Graciosa ◽  
R.N. Harden ◽  
Geneva Jacobs ◽  
Maxine M. Kuroda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Clinical Tool ◽  
Disease Evolution

CRPS: what’s in a name? Taxonomy, epidemiology, neurologic, immune and autoimmune considerations

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (3) ◽  
pp. 376-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael d‘A Stanton-Hicks
Keyword(s):  
Nervous System ◽  
Autonomic Nervous System ◽  
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Clinical Management ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Clinical Syndromes ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Historical Origins

This account of the condition now termed complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) spans approximately 462 years since a description embodying similar clinical features was described by Ambroise Paré in 1557. While reviewing its historical origins, the text describes why it became necessary to change the taxonomies of two clinical syndromes with similar pathophysiologies to one which acknowledges this aspect but does not introduce any mechanistic overtones. Discussed at length is the role of the sympathetic component of the autonomic nervous system (ANS) and why its dysfunction has both directly and indirectly influenced our understanding of the inflammatory aspects of CRPS. As the following article will show, our knowledge has expanded in an exponential fashion to include musculoskeletal, immune, autoimmune, central and peripheral nervous system and ANS dysfunction, all of which increase the complexity of its clinical management. A burgeoning literature is beginning to shed light on the mechanistic aspects of these syndromes and the increasing evidence of a genetic influence on such factors as autoimmunity, and its importance is also discussed at length. An important aspect that has been missing from the diagnostic criteria is a measure of disease severity. The recent validation of a CRPS Severity Score is also included.

A comparison of the accuracy of two sets of diagnostic criteria in the early detection of complex regional pain syndrome following surgical treatment of distal radial fractures

2012 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 609-615 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Żyluk ◽  
H. Mosiejczuk
Keyword(s):  
Surgical Treatment ◽  
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
International Association ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Distal Radial Fracture ◽  
Radial Fracture ◽  
Distal Radial Fractures ◽  
Need For Treatment ◽  
Severity Scores

A total of 120 patients were examined for the presence of symptoms of complex regional pain syndrome after surgical treatment of a distal radial fracture. The patients were assessed at six weeks and 71 of them were also assessed at 12 weeks. The International Association for the Study of Pain criteria and the complex regional pain syndrome severity score were used to make the diagnosis. At six weeks, ten patients (8.3%) met the criteria of complex regional pain syndrome in both the International Association for the Study of Pain and complex regional pain syndrome scores. At 12 weeks six patients (8.4%) met International Association for the Study of Pain and two (2.8%) patients the complex regional pain syndrome severity score criteria. Only one of the patients diagnosed with complex regional pain syndrome required treatment for the complex regional pain syndrome. In all the other patients the features of complex regional pain syndrome settled spontaneously. Our results suggest that complex regional pain syndrome after distal radius fractures occurs less frequently than was previously reported. The International Association for the Study of Pain criteria and the complex regional pain syndrome severity scores showed similar sensitivity in early diagnosis of complex regional pain syndrome, but both are poor indicators of the need for treatment.

Poster 378 Development of a Severity Score for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS)

PM&R ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. S319-S320
Author(s):  
Geneva L. Jacobs ◽  
Joseph R. Graciosa ◽  
R.N. Harden ◽  
Maxine M. Kuroda ◽  
Anjum Sayyad
Keyword(s):  
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Pain Syndrome

scholarly journals Pain Reduction by Inducing Sensory-Motor Adaptation in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS PRISMA): Protocol for a Double-blind Randomized Controlled Trial

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika Halicka ◽  
Axel D Vittersø ◽  
Michael J Proulx ◽  
Janet H Bultitude
Keyword(s):  
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Body Representation ◽  
Therapeutic Effects ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Sham Treatment ◽  
Sensory Motor ◽  
Neuropsychological Changes

AbstractBackgroundComplex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) presents as chronic, continuous pain and sensory, autonomic, and motor abnormalities affecting one or more extremities. People with CRPS can also show changes in their perception of and attention to the affected body part and sensory information in the affected side of space. Prism Adaptation (PA) is a behavioural intervention targeted at reducing attention deficits in post-stroke hemispatial neglect. PA also appears to reduce pain and other CRPS symptoms; however, these therapeutic effects have been demonstrated only in small unblinded studies. This paper describes the protocol for an ongoing double-blind, randomized, sham-controlled clinical trial that will evaluate the efficacy of PA treatment for CRPS. The secondary aims of the study are to examine the relationships between neuropsychological changes (such as spatial attention, space and body representation, and motor spatial performance) and clinical manifestations of CRPS, as well as symptom improvement.MethodsForty-two participants with upper-limb CRPS type I will undergo two weeks of twice-daily PA treatment or sham treatment. The primary outcome measures are current pain intensity and CRPS severity score, measured immediately before and after the treatment period. Secondary outcome measures include the results of self-report questionnaires about pain, movement, symptoms interference, and body representation; clinical assessments of sensory, motor, and autonomic functions; and computer-based psychophysical tests of neuropsychological functions. Data are collected in four research visits: four weeks and one day before treatment, and one day and four weeks after the end of treatment. Additional follow-up through postal questionnaires is conducted three and six months post-treatment.DiscussionIt is hypothesised that participants undergoing PA treatment, compared to those receiving sham treatment, will show greater reduction in pain and CRPS severity score, and improvements on other clinical and neuropsychological measures. Also, more pronounced neuropsychological symptoms are predicted to correlate with more severe clinical CRPS symptoms. This study will provide the first randomized double-blind evaluation of the therapeutic effects of PA that could be implemented as a rehabilitation method for CRPS, and will contribute to the understanding of how neuropsychological changes in body representation and attention pertain to the manifestation and treatment of CRPS.

A prospective, multisite, international validation of the Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Severity Score

Pain ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 158 (8) ◽  
pp. 1430-1436 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Norman Harden ◽  
Christian Maihofner ◽  
Elias Abousaad ◽  
Jean-Jacques Vatine ◽  
Amy Kirsling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ◽  
Severity Score ◽  
Pain Syndrome

A Historical Review of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome in the “Guides Library”

2009 ◽  
Vol 14 (6) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Robert J. Barth
Keyword(s):  
Differential Diagnosis ◽  
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ◽  
Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy ◽  
International Association ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Sixth Edition

Abstract Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a controversial, ambiguous, unreliable, and unvalidated concept that, for these very reasons, has been justifiably ignored in the “AMA Guides Library” that includes the AMAGuides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), the AMA Guides Newsletter, and other publications in this suite. But because of the surge of CRPS-related medicolegal claims and the mission of the AMA Guides to assist those who adjudicate such claims, a discussion of CRPS is warranted, especially because of what some believe to be confusing recommendations regarding causation. In 1994, the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) introduced a newly invented concept, CRPS, to replace the concepts of reflex sympathetic dystrophy (replaced by CRPS I) and causalgia (replaced by CRPS II). An article in the November/December 1997 issue of The Guides Newsletter introduced CRPS and presciently recommended that evaluators avoid the IASP protocol in favor of extensive differential diagnosis based on objective findings. A series of articles in The Guides Newsletter in 2006 extensively discussed the shortcomings of CRPS. The AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, notes that the inherent lack of injury-relatedness for the nonvalidated concept of CRPS creates a dilemma for impairment evaluators. Focusing on impairment evaluation and not on injury-relatedness would greatly simplify use of the AMA Guides.

Peripheral Nerve and Brachial Plexus Impairment, AMA Guides, Sixth Edition

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 3-5
Author(s):  
James B. Talmage ◽  
Jay Blaisdell
Keyword(s):  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ◽  
Lower Extremities ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Upper Extremities ◽  
Motor Deficits ◽  
Type I ◽  
Sixth Edition ◽  
Nerve Entrapments

Abstract Physicians use a variety of methodologies within the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, to rate nerve injuries depending on the type of injury and location of the nerve. Traumatic injuries that cause impairment to the peripheral or brachial plexus nerves are rated using Section 15.4e, Peripheral Nerve and Brachial Plexus Impairment, for upper extremities and Section 16.4c, Peripheral Nerve Rating Process, for lower extremities. Verifiable nerve lesions that incite the symptoms of complex regional pain syndrome, type II (similar to the former concept of causalgia), also are rated in these sections. Nerve entrapments, which are not isolated traumatic events, are rated using the methodology in Section 15.4f, Entrapment Neuropathy. Type I complex regional pain syndrome is rated using Section 15.5, Complex Regional Pain Syndrome for upper extremities or Section 16.5, Complex Regional Pain Syndrome for lower extremities. The method for grading the sensory and motor deficits is analogous to the method described in previous editions of AMA Guides. Rating the permanent impairment of the peripheral nerves or brachial plexus is similar to the methodology used in the diagnosis-based impairment scheme with the exceptions that the physical examination grade modifier is never used to adjust the default rating and the names of individual nerves or plexus trunks, as opposed to the names of diagnoses, appear in the far left column of the rating grids.

Challenges in the Diagnostic Conceptualization of CRPS-1 (Formerly Conceptualized as RSD)

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-3, 9-12
Author(s):  
Robert J. Barth ◽  
Tom W. Bohr
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Complex Regional Pain Syndrome ◽  
Somatoform Disorders ◽  
International Association ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Somatoform Disorder ◽  
Syndrome Type ◽  
Previous Issue

Abstract From the previous issue, this article continues a discussion of the potentially confusing aspects of the diagnostic formulation for complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPS-1) proposed by the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP), the relevance of these issues for a proposed future protocol, and recommendations for clinical practice. IASP is working to resolve the contradictions in its approach to CRPS-1 diagnosis, but it continues to include the following criterion: “[c]ontinuing pain, which is disproportionate to any inciting event.” This language only perpetuates existing issues with current definitions, specifically the overlap between the IASP criteria for CRPS-1 and somatoform disorders, overlap with the guidelines for malingering, and self-contradiction with respect to the suggestion of injury-relatedness. The authors propose to overcome the last of these by revising the criterion: “[c]omplaints of pain in the absence of any identifiable injury that could credibly account for the complaints.” Similarly, the overlap with somatoform disorders could be reworded: “The possibility of a somatoform disorder has been thoroughly assessed, with the results of that assessment failing to produce any consistencies with a somatoform scenario.” The overlap with malingering could be addressed in this manner: “The possibility of malingering has been thoroughly assessed, with the results of that assessment failing to produce any consistencies with a malingering scenario.” The article concludes with six recommendations, and a sidebar discusses rating impairment for CRPS-1 (with explicit instructions not to use the pain chapter for this purpose).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document