Characteristics and Period Prevalence of Self-induced Disorder in Patients Referred to a Pain Clinic With the Diagnosis of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome

Modern Principles of Diagnosis and Treatment in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Background: Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a relatively common complication, occurring in 5% of cases after injury or surgery, particularly in the limbs. The incidence of CPRS is around 5-26/100 000. The latest revision of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD-11) now categorizes CRPS as a primary pain condition of multifactorial origin, rather than a disease of the skeletal system or the autonomic nervous system.

METHODS

Method: Based on a selective search of the literature, we summarize current principles for the diagnosis and treatment of CRPS.

RESULTS

Results: Regional findings in CRPS are accompanied by systemic symptoms, especially by neurocognitive disorders of body perception and of symptom processing. The therapeutic focus is shifting from predominantly passive peripheral measures to early active treatments acting both centrally and peripherally. The treatment is centered on physiotherapy and occupational therapy to improve sensory perception, strength, (fine) motor skills, and sensorimotor integration/ body perception. This is supported by stepped psychological interventions to reduce anxiety and avoidance behavior, medication to decrease inflammation and pain, passive physical measures for reduction of edema and of pain, and medical aids to improve functioning in daily life. Interventional procedures should be limited to exceptional cases and only be performed in specialized centers. Spinal cord and dorsal root ganglion stimulation, respectively, are the interventions with the best evidence.

CONCLUSION

Conclusion: The modern principles for the diagnosis and treatment of CRPS consider both, physiological and psychological mechanisms, with the primary goal of restoring function and participation. More research is needed to strengthen the evidence base in this field.

Complex Regional Pain Syndrome or Limb Pain: A Plea for a Critical Approach

Most frequently, complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) develops after a trauma and affects distal parts of the limbs. Early recognition and initiation of adequate treatment is crucial for a favorable outcome. On the other hand, misdiagnosing other disorders as CRPS is detrimental because more appropriate treatment may be withheld from the patients. Despite intensive research, a specific biomarker or paraclinical measure for CRPS diagnosis is still lacking. Instead, clinical criteria approved by the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) and latest adapted in 2019 are central for diagnosing CPRS. Thus, the CRPS diagnosis remains challenging with the risk of a “deliberate diagnosis” for unexplained pain, while at the same time a delayed CRPS diagnosis prevents early treatment and full recovery. CRPS is a diagnosis of exclusion. To clinically diagnose CRPS, a vigorous exclusion of “other diseases that would better explain the signs and symptoms” are needed before the patients should be referred to tertiary centers for specific pain treatment. We highlight red flags that suggest “non-CRPS” limb pain despite clinical similarity to CRPS. Clinical and neurological examination and paraclinical evaluation of a probably CRPS patient are summarized. Finally, we pinpoint common differential diagnoses for CRPS. This perspective might help CRPS researchers and caregivers to reach a correct diagnosis and choose the right treatment, regardless whether for CRPS mimics or CRPS itself.

Denying the Truth Does Not Change the Facts: A Systematic Analysis of Pseudoscientific Denial of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome

Purpose

Several articles have claimed that complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) does not exist. Although a minority view, it is important to understand the arguments presented in these articles. We conducted a systematic literature search to evaluate the methodological quality of articles that claim CRPS does not exist. We then examined and refuted the arguments supporting this claim using up-to-date scientific literature on CRPS.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL databases. Inclusion criteria for articles were (a) a claim made that CRPS does not exist or that CRPS is not a distinct diagnostic entity and (b) support of these claims with subsequent argument(s). The methodological quality of articles was assessed if possible.

Results

Nine articles were included for analysis: 4 narrative reviews, 2 personal views, 1 letter, 1 editorial and 1 case report. Seven points of controversy were used in these articles to argue that CRPS does not exist: 1) disagreement with the label “CRPS”; 2) the “unclear” pathophysiology; 3) the validity of the diagnostic criteria; 4) CRPS as a normal consequence of immobilization; 5) the role of psychological factors; 6) other identifiable causes for CRPS symptoms; and 7) the methodological quality of CRPS research.

Conclusion

The level of evidence for the claim that CRPS does not exist is very weak. Published accounts concluding that CRPS does not exist, in the absence of primary evidence to underpin them, can harm patients by encouraging dismissal of patients’ signs and symptoms.

Complex regional pain syndrome - Autoimmune or functional neurologic syndrome

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) purports to explain extremity pain accompanied by a variety of subjective complaints, including sensitivity to touch, fatigue, burning sensations, allodynia and signs consistent with voluntary immobilization, including skin changes, edema and trophic changes. By its own definition, CRPS pain is disproportionate to any inciting event or underlying pathology, which means that the syndrome describes non-anatomic and exaggerated symptoms. Although CRPS was coined in the early 1990s, physicians have described unexplained exaggerated pain for centuries. Before a small group of researchers assigned this historical phenomenon with the name CRPS, other physicians in various subspecialties investigated the existence of a common pathophysiologic mechanism but found none. The literature was searched for evidence of a reproducible pathologic mechanism for CRPS. Although some have suggested that CRPS is an autoimmune disease, there is a paucity of evidence to support this. While cytokines such as IL-1β, IL-6 and TNF-α have been detected during the early phases of CRPS, this cannot lead to the conclusion that CRPS is an autoimmune disease, nor that it is an autoinflammatory disorder. Moreover, intravenous immunoglobulin has showed inconsistent results in the treatment of CRPS. On the other hand, CRPS has been found to meet at least three out of four criteria of malingering, which was previously a DSM-IV diagnosis; and its diagnostic criteria are virtually identical to current DSM-5 Functional Neurological Disorder ("FND"), and proposed ICD-11 classification, which includes FND as a distinct neurological diagnosis apart from any psychiatric condition. Unfortunately, the creation of CPRS is not merely misguided brand marketing. It has serious social and health issues. At least in part, the existence of CRPS has led to the labeling of many patients with a diagnosis that allows the inappropriate use of invasive surgery, addictive opioids, and ketamine. The CRPS hypothesis also ignores the nature and purpose of pain, as a symptom of some organic or psychological process. Physicians have long encountered patients who voice symptoms that cannot be biologically explained. Terminology historically used to describe this phenomenon have been medically unexplained symptoms ("MUS"), hysterical, somatic, non-organic, psychogenic, conversion disorder, or dissociative symptoms. The more recent trend describes disorders where there is a functional, rather than structural cause of the symptoms, as "functional disorders." Physicians report high success treating functional neurological symptoms with reassurance, physiotherapy, and cognitive behavior therapy measured in terms of functional improvement. The CRPS label, however, neither leads to functional improvement in these patients nor resolution of symptoms. Under principles of evidence-based medicine, the CRPS label should be abandoned and the syndrome should simply be considered a subset of FNDs, specifically Functional Pain Disorder; and treated appropriately.

Malingering and factitious disorder

Although exaggeration or amplification of symptoms is common in all illness, deliberate deception is rare. In settings associated with litigation/disability evaluation, the rate of malingering may be as high as 30%, but its frequency in clinical practice is not known. We describe the main characteristics of deliberate deception (factitious disorders and malingering) and ways that neurologists might detect symptom exaggeration. The key to establishing that the extent or severity of reported symptoms does not truly represent their severity is to elicit inconsistencies in different domains, but it is not possible to determine whether the reports are intentionally inaccurate. Neurological disorders where difficulty in determining the degree of willed exaggeration is most likely include functional weakness and movement disorders, post-concussional syndrome (or mild traumatic brain injury), psychogenic non-epileptic attacks and complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (especially when there is an associated functional movement disorder). Symptom amplification or even fabrication are more likely if the patient might gain benefit of some sort, not necessarily financial. Techniques to detect deception in medicolegal settings include covert surveillance and review of social media accounts. We also briefly describe specialised psychological tests designed to elicit effort from the patient.

Complex regional pain syndrome type 1 in the medico-legal setting: High rates of somatoform disorders, opiate use and diagnostic uncertainty

Objective The aim of this study was to review demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1 (CRPS) seen in a UK medico-legal setting - particularly the relationship between CRPS and somatoform disorders. Methods Fifty consecutive cases of CRPS (interviewed 2005-2016) undergoing psychiatric assessment were reviewed. A systematic assessment of mental states was conducted via interview and examination of medical/psychiatric records. Thirty patients also completed the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ). Results Sixty per cent of patients ( n = 30) were female, and the mean age was 43 years. Twenty-two per cent ( n = 11) were employed, and 60% ( n = 30) received disability benefits. Symptoms were reported in the upper limb (62%; n = 31), lower limb (30%; n = 15), both (6%; n = 3) or elsewhere (2%; n = 1). Eighty-four per cent ( n = 42) satisfied DSM-5 criteria for current somatoform disorder. A history of more than two pain-related functional somatic syndromes (e.g. non-cardiac chest pain) was found in 42% ( n = 21) and functional neurological symptoms (e.g. 'claw-hand') in 42% ( n = 21). BIPQ scores resembled those associated with somatoform disorders and disorders mediated by psychological factors (e.g. irritable bowel syndrome). In 38% ( n = 19), the CRPS diagnosis was disputed among experts. A history of depression was noted in 60% ( n = 30), panic attacks in 20% ( n = 10) and alcohol/substance misuse in 18% ( n = 9). Opiates were prescribed to 64% ( n = 32). Conclusions Patients diagnosed with CRPS involved in litigation have high rates of prior psychopathology (mainly somatoform disorders) and pain-related disability for which opiate use is common. They risk an adverse reaction to limb pain 'shaped' by maladaptive illness beliefs. The CRPS diagnosis lacks reliability in medico-legal settings and may cause iatrogenic harm.

Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Type 1: Diagnosis and Management

Diagnosis of Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is made primarily on a clinical basis, and no specific test is known to confirm or exclude CRPS diagnosis. That is, there aren’t specific diagnostic tools and instrumental tests are made only for identifying an etiology at the basis of the CRPS. Numerous therapeutic methods have been introduced, but none have shown definitive results. When symptoms persist, patients experience permanent impairment and disability. Therefore, early recognition of CRPS, along with proper treatment, is important for minimizing permanent loss of function. As there is no gold standard test for CRPS, several clinical diagnostic criteria have been introduced and applied in various studies. However, to date, no formal or standardized diagnostic criteria for CRPS have been widely accepted. However, the Budapest diagnostic criteria have recently increased in popularity and are frequently used in scientific studies. The goal for management of CRPS is the return of normal limb function. No specific technique has been shown to prevent CRPS following surgery, but avoidance of prolonged immobilization may be important. Therefore, initiating early post-surgical rehabilitation, where possible, is important. A multidisciplinary approach would seem to be optimal, above all things objectives of physical and occupational therapy are fulfilled with combination pharmacotherapy due to provide pain relief to facilitate physical rehabilitation. Future research using large randomized controlled trials should focus on collecting strong evidence for the etiology of CRPS, testing pharmacological effects, and determining appropriate combination treatment strategies.

Can factitious disorder reach delusional level? A case study

The paper describes a patient, who has been consulted and hospitalized multiple times, due to dermatological lesions on his face. We will present his medical history and describe circumstances leading to the final diagnosis of factitious disorder. In the theoretical part we will try to answer the question, whether the extreme severity of the factitious disorders can, at some point, reach the level of delusions.

Abnormal Brain Responses to Action Observation in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome

Patients with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) display various abnormalities in central motor function, and their pain is intensified when they perform or just observe motor actions. In this study, we examined the abnormalities of brain responses to action observation in CRPS. We analyzed 3-T functional magnetic resonance images from 13 upper limb CRPS patients (all female, ages 31-58 years) and 13 healthy, age- and sex-matched control subjects. The functional magnetic resonance imaging data were acquired while the subjects viewed brief videos of hand actions shown in the first-person perspective. A pattern-classification analysis was applied to characterize brain areas where the activation pattern differed between CRPS patients and healthy subjects. Brain areas with statistically significant group differences (q < .05, false discovery rate-corrected) included the hand representation area in the sensorimotor cortex, inferior frontal gyrus, secondary somatosensory cortex, inferior parietal lobule, orbitofrontal cortex, and thalamus. Our findings indicate that CRPS impairs action observation by affecting brain areas related to pain processing and motor control.

PERSPECTIVE

This article shows that in CRPS, the observation of others' motor actions induces abnormal neural activity in brain areas essential for sensorimotor functions and pain. These results build the cerebral basis for action-observation impairments in CRPS.

The clinical relevance of complex regional pain syndrome type I: The Emperor's New Clothes

The management of patients with chronic pain is a nearly daily challenge to rheumatologists, neurologists, orthopedic surgeons, pain specialists and indeed a issue in nearly every clinical practice. Among the myriad of causes of pain are often included a unique syndrome, generally referred to as complex regional pain syndrome type I (CRPS). Unfortunately CRPS I has become a catch all phase and there are serious questions on whether it exists at all; this has led to an extraordinary number of poorly defined diagnostic criteria. It has also led to an etiologic quagmire that includes features as diverse as autoimmunity to simple trauma. These, in turn, have led to overdiagnosis and often overzealous use of pain medications, including narcotics. In a previous paper, we raised the issue of whether CRPS type I reflected a valid diagnosis. Indeed, the diagnostic criteria for CRPS I, and therefore the diagnosis itself, is unreliable for a number of reasons: 1) the underlying pathophysiology of the signs and symptoms of CPRS I are not biologically plausible; 2) there are no consistent laboratory or imaging testing available; 3) the signs and symptoms fluctuate over time without a medical explanation; 4) the definitions of most studies are derived from statistical analysis with little consideration to required sample size, i.e. power calculations; 5) interobserver reliability in the assessment of the signs and symptoms are often only fair to moderate, and agreement on the diagnosis of "CRPS I" is poor. Even physicians who still believe in the concept of "CRPS I" admit that it is vastly overdiagnosed and has become a diagnosis of last resort, often without a complete differential diagnosis and an alternative explanation. Finally, one of the most convincing arguments that there is no clinical entity as "CRPS I" comes from the enormous heterogeneity in sign and symptom profiles and the heterogeneity of pathophysiological mechanisms postulated. This observation is underscored by the diversity of responses among "CRPS I" patients to essentially all treatment modalities. It has even led to the concept that the signs and symptoms of CRPS can spread throughout the body, as if it is an infectious disease, without any medical plausible explanation. If true progress is to be made in helping patients with pain, it will require entirely new and different concepts and abandoning CRPS I as a legitimate diagnosis.

Factitious disorder: a systematic review of 455 cases in the professional literature

OBJECTIVE

Patients with factitious disorder (FD) fabricate illness, injury or impairment for psychological reasons and, as a result, misapply medical resources. The demographic and clinical profile of these patients has yet to be described in a sufficiently large sample, which has prevented clinicians from adopting an evidence-based approach to FD. The present study aimed to address this issue through a systematic review of cases reported in the professional literature.

METHOD

A systematic search for case studies in the MEDLINE, Web of Science and EMBASE databases was conducted. A total of 4092 records were screened and 684 remaining papers were reviewed. A supplementary search was conducted via GoogleScholar, reference lists of eligible articles and key review papers. In total, 372 eligible studies yielded a sample of 455 cases. Information extracted included age, gender, reported occupation, comorbid psychopathology, presenting signs and symptoms, severity and factors leading to the diagnosis of FD.

RESULTS

A total of 66.2% of patients in our sample were female. Mean age at presentation was 34.2 years. A healthcare or laboratory profession was reported most frequently (N=122). A current or past diagnosis of depression was described more frequently than personality disorder in cases reporting psychiatric comorbidity (41.8% versus 16.5%) and more patients elected to self-induce illness or injury (58.7%) than simulate or falsely report it. Patients were most likely to present with endocrinological, cardiological and dermatological problems. Differences among specialties were observed on demographic factors, severity and factors leading to diagnosis of FD.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the largest sample of patients with FD analyzed to date, our findings offer an important first step toward an evidence-based approach to the disorder. Future guidelines must be sensitive to differing methods used by specialists when diagnosing FD.

Factitious disorders and malingering in relation to functional neurologic disorders

Interest in malingering has grown in recent years, and is reflected in the exponential increase in academic publications since 1990. Although malingering is more commonly detected in medicolegal practice, it is not an all-or-nothing presentation and moreover can vary in the extent of presentation. As a nonmedical disorder, the challenge for clinical practice remains that malingering by definition is intentional and deliberate. As such, clinical skills alone are often insufficient to detect it and we describe psychometric tests such as symptom validity tests and relevant nonmedical investigations. Finally, we describe those areas of neurologic practice where symptom exaggeration and deception are more likely to occur, e.g., postconcussional syndrome, psychogenic nonepileptic seizures, motor weakness and movement disorders, and chronic pain. Factitious disorders are rare in clinical practice and their detection depends largely on the level of clinical suspicion supported by the systematic collection of relevant information from a variety of sources. In this chapter we challenge the accepted DSM-5 definition of factitious disorder and suggest that the traditional glossaries have neglected the extent to which a person's reported symptoms can be considered a product of intentional choice or selective psychopathology largely beyond the subject's voluntary control, or more likely, both. We present evidence to suggest that neurologists preferentially diagnose factitious presentations in healthcare workers as "hysterical," possibly to avoid the stigma of simulated illness.

Invasive Treatments for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome in Children and Adolescents

This review aimed to synthesize the current evidence on the effectiveness of invasive treatments for complex regional pain syndrome in children and adolescents. Studies on children and adolescents with complex regional pain syndrome that evaluated the effects of invasive treatment were identified in PubMed (search March 2013). Thirty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. Articles reported on a total of 173 children and adolescents with complex regional pain syndrome. Generally, many studies lack methodological quality. The invasive treatments applied most often were singular sympathetic blocks, followed by epidural catheters and continuous sympathetic blocks. Rarely, spinal cord stimulation and pain-directed surgeries were reported. An individual patient frequently received more than one invasive procedure. Concerning outcome, for approximately all patients, an improvement in pain and functional disability was reported. However, these outcomes were seldom assessed with validated tools. In conclusion, the evidence level for invasive therapies in the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome in children and adolescents is weak.

Factitious disorders and malingering: challenges for clinical assessment and management

Compared with other psychiatric disorders, diagnosis of factitious disorders is rare, with identification largely dependent on the systematic collection of relevant information, including a detailed chronology and scrutiny of the patient's medical record. Management of such disorders ideally requires a team-based approach and close involvement of the primary care doctor. As deception is a key defining component of factitious disorders, diagnosis has important implications for young children, particularly when identified in women and health-care workers. Malingering is considered to be rare in clinical practice, whereas simulation of symptoms, motivated by financial rewards, is regarded as more common in medicolegal settings. Although psychometric investigations (eg, symptom validity testing) can inform the detection of illness deception, such tests need support from converging evidence sources, including detailed interview assessments, medical notes, and relevant non-medical investigations. A key challenge in any discussion of abnormal health-care-seeking behaviour is the extent to which a person's reported symptoms are considered to be a product of choice, or psychopathology beyond volitional control, or perhaps both. Clinical skills alone are not typically sufficient for diagnosis or to detect malingering. Medical education needs to provide doctors with the conceptual, developmental, and management frameworks to understand and deal with patients whose symptoms appear to be simulated. Central to the understanding of factitious disorders and malingering are the explanatory models and beliefs used to provide meaning for both patients and doctors. Future progress in management will benefit from an increased appreciation of the contribution of non-medical factors and a greater awareness of the conceptual and clinical findings from social neuroscience, occupational health, and clinical psychology.

Review of somatic symptoms in post-traumatic stress disorder

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is associated with both (1) 'ill-defined' or 'medically unexplained' somatic syndromes, e.g. unexplained dizziness, tinnitus and blurry vision, and syndromes that can be classified as somatoform disorders (DSM-IV-TR); and (2) a range of medical conditions, with a preponderance of cardiovascular, respiratory, musculoskeletal, neurological, and gastrointestinal disorders, diabetes, chronic pain, sleep disorders and other immune-mediated disorders in various studies. Frequently reported medical co-morbidities with PTSD across various studies include cardiovascular disease, especially hypertension, and immune-mediated disorders. PTSD is associated with limbic instability and alterations in both the hypothalamic- pituitary-adrenal and sympatho-adrenal medullary axes, which affect neuroendocrine and immune functions, have central nervous system effects resulting in pseudo-neurological symptoms and disorders of sleep-wake regulation, and result in autonomic nervous system dysregulation. Hypervigilance, a central feature of PTSD, can lead to 'local sleep' or regional arousal states, when the patient is partially asleep and partially awake, and manifests as complex motor and/or verbal behaviours in a partially conscious state. The few studies of the effects of standard PTSD treatments (medications, CBT) on PTSD-associated somatic syndromes report a reduction in the severity of ill-defined and autonomically mediated somatic symptoms, self-reported physical health problems, and some chronic pain syndromes.

Complex regional pain syndrome in adults

Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a highly painful, limb-confined condition, which arises usually after trauma. It is associated with a particularly poor quality of life, and large health-care and societal costs. The causes of CRPS remain unknown. The condition's distinct combination of abnormalities includes limb-confined inflammation and tissue hypoxia, sympathetic dysregulation, small fibre damage, serum autoantibodies, central sensitization and cortical reorganization. These features place CRPS at a crossroads of interests of several disciplines including rheumatology, pain medicine and neurology. Significant scientific and clinical advances over the past 10 years hold promise both for an improved understanding of the causes of CRPS, and for more effective treatments. This review summarizes current concepts of our understanding of CRPS in adults. Based on the results from systematic reviews, treatment approaches are discussed within the context of these concepts. The treatment of CRPS is multidisciplinary and aims to educate about the condition, sustain or restore limb function, reduce pain and provide psychological intervention. Results from recent randomized controlled trials suggest that it is possible that some patients whose condition was considered refractory in the past can now be effectively treated, but confirmatory trials are required. The review concludes with a discussion of the need for additional research.