Back

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

Monika Halicka; Axel D Vittersø; Michael J Proulx; Janet H Bultitude

2019-06-25 pain medicine
10.1101/19000653
Show abstract

BackgroundComplex 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.

Matching journals

1
PLOS ONE
Public Library of Science (PLoS) · based on 1737 published papers
Top 20%
18.6%
2
BMC Neurology
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 11 published papers
#1
167× avg
3
Pain
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) · based on 15 published papers
Top 0.3%
113× avg
4
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
Frontiers Media SA · based on 11 published papers
#1
177× avg
5
Frontiers in Neurology
Frontiers Media SA · based on 74 published papers
Top 3%
9.0× avg
6
The Journal of Pain
Elsevier BV · based on 11 published papers
Top 0.4%
75× avg
7
BMJ Open
BMJ · based on 553 published papers
Top 22%
4.9%
8
Scientific Reports
Springer Science and Business Media LLC · based on 701 published papers
Top 48%
3.1%
9
Neurorehabilitation and Neural Repair
SAGE Publications · based on 11 published papers
Top 1%
17× avg
10
Stroke
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) · based on 29 published papers
Top 2%
8.9× avg
11
Frontiers in Neuroscience
Frontiers Media SA · based on 29 published papers
Top 2%
9.2× avg
12
Brain Sciences
MDPI AG · based on 19 published papers
Top 0.8%
19× avg
13
Human Brain Mapping
Wiley · based on 53 published papers
Top 6%
2.8× avg
14
Social Science & Medicine
Elsevier BV · based on 15 published papers
Top 2%
9.9× avg
15
BMJ Open Quality
BMJ · based on 15 published papers
Top 2%
8.1× avg
16
Journal of Clinical Medicine
MDPI AG · based on 77 published papers
Top 14%
0.9%
17
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Wiley · based on 19 published papers
Top 2%
6.1× avg
18
NeuroImage: Clinical
Elsevier BV · based on 77 published papers
Top 8%
1.9× avg
19
Brain
Oxford University Press (OUP) · based on 69 published papers
Top 7%
1.9× avg
20
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Elsevier BV · based on 19 published papers
Top 4%
6.3× avg
21
British Journal of Anaesthesia
Elsevier BV · based on 13 published papers
Top 2%
5.2× avg