Chronic neuropathic pain in spinal cord injury patients: What relevant additional clinical exams should be performed?

Effectiveness of motor imagery in complex regional pain syndrome: A systematic review with meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of motor imagery (MI) on pain intensity and disability in individuals with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS).

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in various electronic databases to identify all relevant studies: PubMed, CINAHL, WOS, PEDro, CENTRAL, and Scopus. Randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of MI in individuals with CRPS were included. The risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool, the methodological quality was evaluated using PEDro scale, and the level of evidence was reported according to the GRADE. Between-groups standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated.

RESULTS

Six studies were included. The meta-analysis found moderate-quality evidence that MI improves pain intensity and related disability as immediate (pain: SMD -1.07, 95% CI: -1.53 to -0.60; disability: SMD 1.05, 95% CI: 0.59 to 1.51), short-term (pain: SMD -1.28, 95% CI: -2.14 to -0.42; disability: SMD 1.37; 95% CI: 0.16 to 2.58), and long-term effects (pain: SMD -1.18; 95% CI: -1.89 to -0.46; disability: SMD 1.18; 95% CI: 0.46 to 1.89), as compared with a comparison group. The risk of bias of the trials was relatively low, but the imprecision of the results downgraded the level of evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-quality evidence suggests a positive effect of MI for improving pain intensity and disability immediately after and at short-term in individuals with CRPS.

Evidence-based position paper on Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) professional practice for persons with spinal cord injury. The European PRM position (UEMS PRM Section)

INTRODUCTION

Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a devastating condition and a challenge for every health system and every society. This EBPP represents the official position of the European Union through the UEMS PRM Section and designates the professional role of PRM physicians for people with SCI. The aim of the paper was to improve Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine (PRM) physicians' professional practice for persons with SCI in order to improve their functionality, social and community reintegration, and to overcome activity limitations and/or participation restrictions.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

A systematic review of the literature and a consensus procedure by means of a Delphi process have been performed involving the delegates of all European countries represented in the UEMS PRM Section.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

The systematic literature review is reported together with thirty-eight recommendations resulting from the Delphi procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

The professional role of PRM physicians who have expertise in the rehabilitation of SCI is to run rehabilitation programmes in multi-professional teams, working in an interdisciplinary way in a variety of settings to improve the functioning of people with SCI.

Investigating comparability of quantitative computed tomography with dual energy x-ray absorptiometry in assessing bone mineral density of patients with chronic spinal cord injury

STUDY DESIGN

Psychometric study using retrospectively collected data.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the comparability of quantitative computed tomography (qCT) in assessing bone mineral density (BMD) with dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA). We evaluated how well previously suggested normal values for spinal Hounsfield units (HU) correlated with routine DXA results in patients with chronic spinal cord injury (SCI). Furthermore, we investigated inter/intra-observer reliability of measuring HU in the spine.

SETTING

Academic medical center in Tehran, Iran.

METHODS

Spinal CT scans of 44 male participants with chronic SCI who had undergone DXA studies on the same day were selected. The main outcome measures were sensitivity, specificity, and area under curve (AUC) of HU at each spinal region against DXA results of areal BMD. The secondary outcome was inter/intra-observer reliability of measuring HU in the spinal column.

RESULTS

We found no significant difference between qCT and DXA results (p-value = 0.237, R = 0.188). However, the two methods showed overall unfavorable comparability, with a sensitivity of 0%, 0%, and 80%, specificity of 50%, 90%, and 85%, and area under curve (AUC) of 0.27, 0.53, and 0.83 for cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine, respectively. The best comparability was achieved at the lumbar region although not statistically significant (p-value = 0.072). Measuring HU was reliable (inter/intra-observer reliability >98%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that currently proposed normal values result in unfavorable comparability in the cervical and thoracic regions; however, as the agreement improved at the lumbar spine, it is possible that qCT could become an indicator of bone strength with further research.