The effectiveness of transcranial direct current stimulation as an add-on modality to graded motor imagery for treatment of complex regional pain syndrome: A randomized proof of concept study

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of graded motor imagery (GMI) for the management of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is supported by evidence, but its treatment effect remains generally modest. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) has been advocated as an adjunct intervention to enhance the effect of motor imagery approaches in pain populations. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of GMI+active tDCS compared to the GMI+sham tDCS in the treatment of CRPS type I. METHODS: 22 patients (n=11/group) were randomly assigned to the experimental (GMI+tDCS) or placebo (GMI+sham tDCS) group. GMI treatments lasted 6 weeks; anodal tDCS was applied over the motor cortex for 5 consecutive days during the first 2 weeks and once a week thereafter. Changes in pain perception, quality of life, kinesiophobia, pain catastrophizing, anxiety and mood were monitored after 6 weeks of treatment (T1) and 1-month post treatment (T2). RESULTS: GMI+tDCS induced no statistically significant reduction in pain compared to GMI+sham tDCS. Although we observed significant group differences in kinesiophobia (P=0.012), pain catastrophizing (P=0.049) and anxiety (P=0.046) at T1, these improvements were not maintained at T2 and did not reached a clinically significant difference. DISCUSSION: We found no added value of tDCS combined with GMI treatments for reducing pain in patients with chronic CRPS. However, given that GMI+sham tDCS induced no significant change, further studies comparing GMI+tDCS and tDCS alone are needed to further document tDCS's effect in CRPS

Personalizing rehabilitation for individuals with musculoskeletal impairments: Feasibility of implementation of the Measures Associated to Prognostic (MAPS) tool

The Measures Associated to PrognoStic (MAPS) tool is a standardized questionnaire that integrates validated prognostic tools to detect the presence of biopsychosocial prognostic factors in patients consulting for musculoskeletal disorders. The objectives were to assess the: 1) feasibility of implementation of the MAPS tool, 2) clinicians’ acceptability of the dashboard, and 3) patients’ acceptability of the MAPS tool. Twenty physiotherapists and two occupational therapists from seven outpatient musculoskeletal clinics were recruited to implement the MAPS tool during a 3-month timeframe, where new patients completed the questionnaire upon initial assessment. The results were presented to the clinicians via a dashboard. Surveys and semi-structured interviews were conducted to measure feasibility and acceptability. Six out of 11 feasibility criteria (55%) and 21 out of 24 acceptability criteria (88%) reached the a priori threshold for success. The interviews allowed us to identify three main themes to facilitate implementation: 1) limiting the burden, 2) ensuring patients’ understanding of the tool’s purpose, and 3) integrating the dashboard as a clinical information tool. Our quantitative and qualitative results support the feasibility of implementation and acceptability of the MAPS tool pending minor adjustments. Depicting the patients’ prognostic profile has the potential to help clinicians optimize their interventions for patients presenting with musculoskeletal disorders.</p