9 research outputs found
Bodily Sensory Inputs and Anomalous Bodily Experiences in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: Evaluation of the Potential Effects of Sound Feedback
Neuroscientific studies have shown that human's mental body representations are not fixed but are constantly updated through sensory feedback, including sound feedback. This suggests potential new therapeutic sensory approaches for patients experiencing body-perception disturbances (BPD). BPD can occur in association with chronic pain, for example in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS). BPD often impacts on emotional, social, and motor functioning. Here we present the results from a proof-of-principle pilot study investigating the potential value of using sound feedback for altering BPD and its related emotional state and motor behavior in those with CRPS. We build on previous findings that real-time alteration of the sounds produced by walking can alter healthy people's perception of their own body size, while also resulting in more active gait patterns and a more positive emotional state. In the present study we quantified the emotional state, BPD, pain levels and gait of twelve people with CRPS Type 1, who were exposed to real-time alteration of their walking sounds. Results confirm previous reports of the complexity of the BPD linked to CRPS, as participants could be classified into four BPD subgroups according to how they mentally visualize their body. Further, results suggest that sound feedback may affect the perceived size of the CRPS affected limb and the pain experienced, but that the effects may differ according to the type of BPD. Sound feedback affected CRPS descriptors and other bodily feelings and emotions including feelings of emotional dominance, limb detachment, position awareness, attention and negative feelings toward the limb. Gait also varied with sound feedback, affecting the foot contact time with the ground in a way consistent with experienced changes in body weight. Although, findings from this small pilot study should be interpreted with caution, they suggest potential applications for regenerating BDP and its related bodily feelings in a clinical setting for patients with chronic pain and BPD
The GWAS-selected SNPs association with AD, CRC or PCa, considering allelic and additive models.
<p>Bold denotes significant association (<i>p</i><0.05). G1 vs. G2; compared groups of cases and controls, respectively, MA; minor allele (+) strand, F1, F2; frequency of MA in the case and control groups, respectively, OR; odds ratio, CI; confidence interval, N; control, PCa; prostate cancer, AD; adenoma, CRC; colorectal cancer, F; female, M; male.</p>a<p><sup>/</sup>SNP identifier based on NCBI SNP database;</p>b<p><sup>/</sup>NCBI ID of genes localized in proximity to the SNPs of interest (source: HapMap).</p
The literature-selected SNPs significant associations with AD, CRC or PCa, considering allelic and additive models.
<p>Bold denotes significant association (<i>p</i>-value<sub>cor</sub><0.05). MA; minor allele (+) strand, G1 vs. G2; compared groups of cases and controls, respectively, OR; odds ratio, CI; confidence interval, N; control, PCa; prostate cancer, AD; adenoma, CRC; colorectal cancer, F; female, M; male.</p>a<p><sup>/</sup>SNP identifier based on NCBI SNP database;</p>b<p><sup>/</sup>NCBI ID of genes localized in proximity to the SNPs of interest (source: HapMap).</p
Group statistics of the GWAS and the replication study cohorts.
<p>The GWAS validation panel indicates numbers of patients (N) enrolled in the GWAS, after excluding microarrays that did not meet quality control criteria based on the PCA results. The ‘Range’ and ‘Median’ values regard age of cases and controls in respective groups. Both GWAS validation and replication analyses were done using respective individual patient TaqMan® genotyping. The TaqMan® genotyping data was subjected to a quality filtration using the 5% threshold of per-individual maximum genotype missingness (see ‘<i>Statistical analyses – individual genotyping</i>’).</p
Meta-analysis of previously reported PCa and CRC associations including replication results from the present study.
a<p><sup>/</sup>SNP identifier based on NCBI SNP database;</p>b<p><sup>/</sup>meta-analysis was done for minor allele (MA).</p
Pooled-DNA allelotyping GWAS and technical validation of GWAS selections using individual patient TaqMan genotyping.
<p>Technical validation was performed by individual typing of DNA samples from the same study cohorts used for pooled-DNA GWAS. The allele frequency distribution and χ<sup>2</sup>-test <i>p</i>-values were taken into account. G1 vs. G2; compared groups of cases and controls, respectively, MA; minor allele (+) strand, F1, F2; frequency of MA in the case and control groups, respectively, OR; odds ratio, CI; confidence interval, N; control, PCa; prostate cancer, AD; adenoma, CRC; colorectal cancer, F; female, M; male.</p>a<p><sup>/</sup>SNP identifier based on NCBI SNP database;</p>b<p><sup>/</sup>SNP identified in two independent comparisons.</p
GWAS-selected SNPs and associations with coeliac disease.
<p>GWAS-selected SNPs and associations with coeliac disease.</p
Frequencies of positive predicting alleles.
<p>Frequencies of positive predicting alleles.</p
Manhattan plot showing CD associations with the susceptibility region on chromosome 6.
<p>Manhattan plot showing CD associations with the susceptibility region on chromosome 6.</p