Comparison of tonic spinal cord stimulation, high-frequency and burst stimulation in patients with complex regional pain syndrome: a double-blind, randomised placebo controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) is a disabling disease that is sometimes difficult to treat. Although spinal cord stimulation (SCS) can reduce pain in most patients with CRPS, some do not achieve the desired reduction in pain. Moreover, the pain reduction can diminish over time even after an initially successful period of SCS. Pain reduction can be regained by increasing the SCS frequency, but this has not been investigated in a prospective trial. This study compares pain reduction using five SCS frequencies (standard 40 Hz, 500 Hz, 1200 Hz, burst and placebo stimulation) in patients with CRPS to determine which of the modalities is most effective. DESIGN: All patients with a confirmed CRPS diagnosis that have unsuccessfully tried all other therapies and are eligible for SCS, can enroll in this trial (primary implantation group). CRPS patients that already receive SCS therapy, or those previously treated with SCS but with loss of therapeutic effect over time, can also participate (re-implantation group). Once all inclusion criteria are met and written informed consent obtained, patients will undergo a baseline assessment (T0). A 2-week trial with SCS is performed and, if successful, a rechargeable internal pulse generator (IPG) is implanted. For the following 3 months the patient will have standard 40 Hz stimulation therapy before a follow-up assessment (T1) is performed. Those who have completed the T1 assessment will enroll in a 10-week crossover period in which the five SCS frequencies are tested in five periods, each frequency lasting for 2 weeks. At the end of the crossover period, the patient will choose which frequency is to be used for stimulation for an additional 3 months, until the T2 assessment. DISCUSSION: Currently no trials are available that systematically investigate the importance of variation in frequency during SCS in patients with CRPS. Data from this trial will provide better insight as to whether SCS with a higher frequency, or with burst stimulation, results in more effective pain relief. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN3665525

The reliability of side to side measurements of upper extremity activity levels in healthy subjects

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In both clinical and occupational settings, ambulatory sensors are becoming common for assessing all day measurements of arm motion. In order for the motion of a healthy, contralateral side to be used as a control for the involved side, the inherent side to side differences in arm usage must be minimal. The goal of the present study was to determine the reliability of side to side measurements of upper extremity activity levels in healthy subjects.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Thirty two subjects with no upper extremity pathologies were studied. Each subject wore a triaxial accelerometer on both arms for three and a half hours. Motion was assessed using parameters previously reported in the literature. Side to side differences were compared with the intraclass correlation coefficient, standard error of the mean, minimal detectable change scores and a projected sample size analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The variables were ranked based on their percentage of minimal detectable change scores and sample sizes needed for paired t-tests. The order of these rankings was found to be identical and the top ranked parameters were activity counts per hour (MDC% = 9.5, n = 5), jerk time (MDC% = 15.8, n = 8) and percent time above 30 degrees (MDC% = 34.7, n = 9).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>In general, the mean activity levels during daily activities were very similar between dominant and non-dominant arms. Specifically, activity counts per hour, jerk time, and percent time above 30 degrees were found to be the variables most likely to reveal significant difference or changes in both individuals and groups of subjects. The use of ambulatory measurements of upper extremity activity has very broad uses for occupational assessments, musculoskeletal injuries of the shoulder, elbow, wrist and hand as well as neurological pathologies.</p

German translation and external validation of the Radboud Skills Questionnaire in patients suffering from Complex Regional Pain Syndrome 1

BACKGROUND: Patients suffering from Complex Regional Pain Syndrome commonly complain of substantial limitations in their activities of daily living. The Radboud Skills Questionnaire measures alterations in the level of disability of patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, but this instrument is currently not available in German. The goals of our study were to translate the Dutch Radboud Skills Questionnaire into German and to assess its external criterion validity with the German version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire. METHODS: We translated the Radboud Skills Questionnaire according to published guidelines. Demographic data and validity were assessed in 57 consecutive patients with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome 1 of the upper extremity. Information on age, duration of symptoms, type of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome 1 and type of initiating event was obtained. We assessed the external criterion validity by comparing the German Radboud Skills Questionnaire and the German Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire and calculated the prediction intervals. RESULTS: Score values ranged from 55.4 +/- 22.0 for the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire score and 140.1 +/- 39.2 for the Radboud Skills Questionnaire. We found a high correlation between the Radboud Skills Questionnaire and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (R2 = 0.83). CONCLUSION: This validation of the Radboud Skills Questionnaire demonstrates that this German version is a simple and accurate instrument to assess and quantify disabilities of patients suffering from Complex Regional Pain Syndrome 1 of the upper extremity for clinical and research purposes

Derangement of body representation in complex regional pain syndrome: report of a case treated with mirror and prisms

Perhaps the most intriguing disorders of body representation are those that are not due to primary disease of brain tissue. Strange and sometimes painful phantom limb sensations can result from loss of afference to the brain; and Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS)—the subject of the current report—can follow limb trauma without pathology of either the central or peripheral nervous system. This enigmatic and vexing condition follows relatively minor trauma, and can result in enduring misery and a useless limb. It manifests as severe pain, autonomic dysfunction, motor disability and ‘neglect-like’ symptoms with distorted body representation. For this special issue on body representation we describe the case of a patient suffering from CRPS, including symptoms suggesting a distorted representation of the affected limb. We report contrasting effects of mirror box therapy, as well as a new treatment—prism adaptation therapy—that provided sustained pain relief and reduced disability. The benefits were contingent upon adapting with the affected limb. Other novel observations suggest that: (1) pain may be a consequence, not the cause, of a disturbance of body representation that gives rise to the syndrome; (2) immobilisation, not pain, may precipitate this reorganisation of somatomotor circuits in susceptible individuals; and (3) limitation of voluntary movement is neither due to pain nor to weakness but, rather, to derangement of body representation which renders certain postures from the repertoire of hand movements inaccessible

CRPS I following artificial disc surgery: case report and review of the literature

We report a case of type 1 complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS I) of the left leg following the implantation of an artificial disc type in the L4/5 segment of the lumbar spine using a midline left-sided retroperitoneal approach. This approach included the mobilisation of the sympathetic trunk with incision and resection of the intervertebral disc. The perioperative and immediate postoperative periods were uneventful, but on the second postoperative day the patient complained of a progressive allodynia of the whole left leg in combination with weakness of the limb. Neurological examination did not reveal any radicular deficit or paresis. A sympathetic reaction following the mobilisation of the sympathetic trunk during the ventral preparation of the spine was suspected and investigated further. A diagnosis of CRPS I was proposed, and the patient was treated with analgesia, co-analgesics for pain alienation, and systemic corticosteroid therapy. A computed tomography-guided sympathetic block and lymphatic drainage were performed. Following conservative orthopaedic rehabilitation therapy, the degree of pain, allodynia, weakness, and swelling were reduced and the condition of the patient was ameliorated. The cost–benefit ratio of spinal arthroplasty is still controversial. The utility of this paper is to debate a possible cause of a painful complication, which can invalidate the results of a successful operation

Daily physical activity assessment: what is the importance of upper limb movements vs whole body movements?

OBJECTIVE: The movement of the upper limbs (eg fidgeting-like activities) is a meaningful component of nonexercise activity thermogenesis (NEAT). This study examined the relationship between upper limb movements and whole body trunk movements, by simultaneously measuring energy expenditure during the course of the day. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study consisting of 88 subjects with a wide range in body mass index (17.3-32.5 kg/m(2)). The energy expenditure over a 24-h period was measured in a large respiratory chamber. The body movements were assessed by two uniaxial-accelerometers during daytime, one on the waist and the other on the dominant arm. The accelerometry scores from level 0 (=immobile) up to level 9 (=maximal intensity) were recorded. The activities of subjects were classified into eight categories: walking at two speeds on a horizontal treadmill (A &amp; B), ambling (C), self-care tasks (D), desk work (E), meals (F), reading (G), watching TV (H). RESULTS: There was a significant relationship between the accelerometry scores from the waist (ACwaist) and that from the wrist (ACwrist) over the daytime period (R(2)=0.64; P&lt;0.001). The ACwrist was systematically higher than the ACwaist during sedentary activities, whereas it was the reverse for walking activities. ACwrist to ACwaist ratio of activities E-H were above 1.0 and for walking activities (A-C) were below 1.0. A multiple regression analysis for predicting daytime energy expenditure revealed that the explained variance improved by 2% only when the ACwrist was added as a second predictor in addition to the ACwaist. This indicates that the effect of the ACwrist for predicting energy expenditure was of limited importance in our conditions of measurement. CONCLUSIONS: The acceleration of the upper limbs which includes fidgeting is more elevated than that of the whole body for sitting/lying down activities. However, their contribution to energy expenditure is lower than whole body trunk movements, thus indicating that the weight-bearing locomotion activities may be a key component of NEAT. However, its contribution may depend on the total duration of the upper limb movements during the course of the day