Sensory Function and Psychological Factors in Children With Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Type 1

Objective: To assess thermal-sensory thresholds and psychosocial factors in children with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Type 1 (CRPS-I) compared to healthy children. Methods: We conducted quantitative sensory testing on 34 children with CRPS-I and 56 pain-free children. Warm, cool, heat, and cold stimuli were applied to the forearm. Children with CRPS-I had the protocol administered to the pain site and the contralateral-pain site. Participants completed the self-report Behavior Assessment System for Children. Results: Longer pain durations (>5.1 months) were associated with decreased sensitivity to cold pain on the pain site ( P = .04). Higher pain-intensity ratings were associated with elevated anxiety scores ( P = .03). Anxiety and social stress were associated with warmth sensitivity (both P < .05) on the contralateral-pain site. Conclusions: Pain duration is an important factor in assessing pediatric CRPS-I. Hyposensitivity in the affected limb may emerge due to degeneration of nociceptive nerves. Anxiety may contribute to thermal-sensory perception in childhood CRPS-I.

Download Full-text

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

Guides Newsletter ◽

10.1001/amaguidesnewsletters.2006.marapr01 ◽

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).

Download Full-text