scholarly journals Type 1 Complex Regional Pain Syndrome in upper limb and mirror therapy in sub-acute phase of stroke: Comparison of two protocols by SCED method

2017 ◽  
Vol 60 ◽  
pp. e76
Author(s):  
Clémence Vidal ◽  
Erwan Bagot ◽  
Chloé Blum ◽  
Agata Krasny-Pacini ◽  
Marie-Eve Isner-Horobeti
2017 ◽  
Vol 30 (3) ◽  
pp. 441-449 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guillermo Méndez-Rebolledo ◽  
Valeska Gatica-Rojas ◽  
Rafael Torres-Cueco ◽  
María Albornoz-Verdugo ◽  
Eduardo Guzmán-Muñoz

2012 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 138-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emilie Lagueux ◽  
Joelle Charest ◽  
Eve Lefrançois-Caron ◽  
Marie-Eve Mauger ◽  
Emilie Mercier ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
S.S. Strafun ◽  
O.A. Burianov ◽  
V.V. Povorozniuk ◽  
O.G. Gayko ◽  
N.V. Hryhorieva ◽  
...  

Summary. Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Type I (CRPS I) (G90.5) is a set of condi- tions accompanied by regional pain that is disproportionate in time and degree relative to the normal course of the post-traumatic period or other lesion, does not correspond to the zones of innervation of certain nerves or nerve roots and is usually manifested by sensory, motor, vasomotor, and/or trophic disorders in distal extremities. A multidisciplinary consensus on the basic principles of diagnosis and treatment of complex regional pain syndrome type 1 was adopted at a round table meeting at the XVIII Congress of Orthope- dists Traumatologists of Ukraine in Ivano-Frankivsk on October 10, 2019.Principles of diagnosis and treatment:1) Individual approach taking into account the leading pathogenetic mechanisms of the disease.2) Control over the total number of appointments.3) Using the Bruehl, Atkins or Veldman criteria to diagnose CRPS I.The treatment influence the following links of the pathogenesis of the disease or indi- vidual symptoms: a) inflammation – DMSO (compresses), corticosteroids (short course), b) pain – gabapentin or pregabalin, in case of low effect – antidepressants (in case of no effect – pain treatment by using subanesthetic doses of ketamine, narcotic analge- sics, implantation of neurostimulants or pumps for intrathecal drug administration or sympathetic blocks); c) central nervous system training (mirror therapy, imaging and behavioral therapy, etc.); d) reduction of fear of movements and pain; e) anti-edema and venotonic agents; f) vitamin C; g) activation of the affected limb with increase in range of movements, muscle strength and load tolerance (immobilization only accord- ing to strict indications); с) transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the nerves, ultra high frequency (UHF) in impulse mode and oligothermal dose; i) surgical interventions - surgical treatment is indicated for CRPS type II; for CRPS type I it is indicated in cases where such treatment is intended to eliminate the trigger for CRPS development with adequate multimodal anesthesia/analgesia.


2009 ◽  
Vol 361 (6) ◽  
pp. 634-636 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angelo Cacchio ◽  
Elisabetta De Blasis ◽  
Stefano Necozione ◽  
Ferdinando di Orio ◽  
Valter Santilli

2016 ◽  
Vol 97 (4) ◽  
pp. 575-581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Secil Pervane Vural ◽  
Guldal Funda Nakipoglu Yuzer ◽  
Didem Sezgin Ozcan ◽  
Sibel Demir Ozbudak ◽  
Nese Ozgirgin

2009 ◽  
Vol 23 (8) ◽  
pp. 792-799 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angelo Cacchio ◽  
Elisabetta De Blasis ◽  
Vincenzo De Blasis ◽  
Valter Santilli ◽  
Giorgio Spacca

Background. Complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPSt1) of the upper limb is a painful and debilitating condition, frequent after stroke, and interferes with the rehabilitative process and outcome. However, treatments used for CRPSt1 of the upper limb are limited. Objective. This randomized controlled study was conducted to compare the effectiveness on pain and upper limb function of mirror therapy on CRPSt1 of upper limb in patients with acute stroke. Methods. Of 208 patients with first episode of unilateral stroke admitted to the authors’ rehabilitation center, 48 patients with CRPSt1 of the affected upper limb were enrolled in a randomized controlled study, with a 6-month follow-up, and assigned to either a mirror therapy group or placebo control group. The primary end points were a reduction in the visual analogue scale score of pain at rest, on movement, and brush-induced tactile allodynia. The secondary end points were improvement in motor function as assessed by the Wolf Motor Function Test and Motor Activity Log. Results. The mean scores of both the primary and secondary end points significantly improved in the mirror group ( P < .001). No statistically significant improvement was observed in any of the control group values ( P > .001). Moreover, statistically significant differences after treatment ( P < .001) and at the 6-month follow-up were found between the 2 groups. Conclusions. The results indicate that mirror therapy effectively reduces pain and enhances upper limb motor function in stroke patients with upper limb CRPSt1.


Pain ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fabiënne C Schasfoort ◽  
Johannes B.J Bussmann ◽  
Annemarie M.A.J Zandbergen ◽  
Henk J Stam

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document