The DOI matches its Crossref record; 103 of the 103 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pharmacologic interventions for treating phantom limb pain
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: This is an updated version of the original Cochrane review published in Issue 12, 2011. Phantom limb pain (PLP) is pain that arises in the missing limb after amputation and can be severe, intractable, and disabling. Various medications have been studied in the treatment of phantom pain. There is currently uncertainty in the optimal pharmacologic management of PLP. OBJECTIVES: This review aimed to summarise the evidence of effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions in treating PLP. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, the Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, and Embase for relevant studies. We ran the searches for the original review in September 2011 and subsequent searches for this update up to April 2016. We sought additional studies from clinical trials databases and reference lists of retrieved papers. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised and quasi-randomised trials studying the effectiveness of pharmacologic interventions compared with placebo, another active treatment, or no treatment, in established PLP. We considered the following outcomes: change in pain intensity, function, sleep, depression or mood, quality of life, adverse events, treatment satisfaction, and withdrawals from the study. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We independently assessed issues of study quality and extracted efficacy and adverse event data. Due to the wide variability in the studies, we did not perform a meta-analysis for all the interventions and outcomes, but attempted to pool the results of some studies where possible. We prepared a qualitative description and narrative summary of results. We assessed clinical heterogeneity by making qualitative comparisons of the populations, interventions, outcomes/outcome measures, and methods. MAIN RESULTS: We added only one new study with 14 participants to this updated review. We included a 14 studies (10 with low risk of bias and 4 with unclear risk of bias overall) with a total of 269 participants. We added another drug class, botulinum neurotoxins (BoNTs), in particular botulinum toxin A (BoNT/A), to the group of medications reviewed previously. Our primary outcome was change in pain intensity. Most studies did not report our secondary outcomes of sleep, depression or mood, quality of life, treatment satisfaction, or withdrawals from the study.BoNT/A did not improve phantom limb pain intensity during the six months of follow-up compared with lidocaine/methylprednisolone.Compared with placebo, morphine (oral and intravenous) was effective in decreasing pain intensity in the short term with reported adverse events being constipation, sedation, tiredness, dizziness, sweating, voiding difficulty, vertigo, itching, and respiratory problems.The N-methyl D-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonists ketamine (versus placebo; versus calcitonin) and dextromethorphan (versus placebo), but not memantine, had analgesic effects. The adverse events of ketamine were more serious than placebo and calcitonin and included loss of consciousness, sedation, hallucinations, hearing and position impairment, and insobriety.The results for gabapentin in terms of pain relief were conflicting, but combining the results favoured treatment group (gabapentin) over control group (placebo) (mean difference -1.16, 95% confidence interval -1.94 to -0.38; 2 studies). However, gabapentin did not improve function, depression score, or sleep quality. Adverse events experienced were somnolence, dizziness, headache, and nausea.Compared with an active control benztropine mesylate, amitriptyline was not effective in PLP, with dry mouth and dizziness as the most frequent adverse events based on one study.The findings for calcitonin (versus placebo; versus ketamine) and local anaesthetics (versus placebo) were variable. Adverse events of calcitonin were headache, vertigo, drowsiness, nausea, vomiting, and hot and cold flushes. Most of the studies were limited by their small sample sizes. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Since the last version of this review, we identified another study that added another form of medical therapy, BoNTs, specifically BoNT/A, to the list of pharmacologic interventions being reviewed for clinical efficacy in phantom limb pain. However, the results of this study did not substantially change the main conclusions. The short- and long-term effectiveness of BoNT/A, opioids, NMDA receptor antagonists, anticonvulsants, antidepressants, calcitonins, and local anaesthetics for clinically relevant outcomes including pain, function, mood, sleep, quality of life, treatment satisfaction, and adverse events remain unclear. Based on a small study, BoNT/A (versus lidocaine/methylprednisolone) does not decrease phantom limb pain. Morphine, gabapentin, and ketamine demonstrate favourable short-term analgesic efficacy compared with placebo. Memantine and amitriptyline may not be effective for PLP. However, results must be interpreted with caution, as
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?
Jadad, A. R., Moore, R. A., Carroll, D., Jenkinson, C., Reynolds, D. J. M., Gavaghan, D. J., & McQuay, H. J. (1996) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4 · Cited by 17,582
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration
Higgins, J., Green, S. R., & Higgins, J. (2008) · Cited by 5,544
Central sensitization: implications for the diagnosis and treatment of pain
Woolf, C. J. (2011) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2010.09.030 · Cited by 4,771
Pharmacotherapy for neuropathic pain in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Finnerup, N. B., Attal, N., Haroutounian, S., McNicol, E., Baron, R., Dworkin, R. H., Gilron, I., Haanpää, M., Hansson, P., Jensen, T. S., et al. (2015) · The Lancet Neurology · doi:10.1016/s1474-4422(14)70251-0 · Cited by 3,980
Estimating the Prevalence of Limb Loss in the United States: 2005 to 2050
Ziegler-Graham, K., MacKenzie, E. J., Ephraim, P. L., Travison, T. G., & Brookmeyer, R. (2008) · Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2007.11.005 · Cited by 2,816
Updated Method Guidelines for Systematic Reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group
van Tulder, M., Furlan, A., Bombardier, C., & Bouter, L. (2003) · Spine · doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000065484.95996.af · Cited by 2,180
Phantom-limb pain as a perceptual correlate of cortical reorganization following arm amputation
Flor, H., Elbert, T., Knecht, S., Wienbruch, C., Pantev, C., Birbaumers, N., Larbig, W., & Taub, E. (1995) · Nature · doi:10.1038/375482a0 · Cited by 1,845
Opioids in chronic non-cancer pain: systematic review of efficacy and safety
Kalso, E., Edwards, J. E., Moore, A. R., & McQuay, H. J. (2004) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2004.09.019 · Cited by 1,216
Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
Modarresi, O. A. F., & Shakibaie, M. M. M. R. (2015) · Cited by 1,111
Opioids for chronic noncancer pain: A meta-analysis of effectiveness and side effects
Furlan, A. D. (2006) · Canadian Medical Association Journal · doi:10.1503/cmaj.051528 · Cited by 873
Cited by
Dumanian, G. A., Potter, B. K., Mioton, L. M., Ko, J. H., Cheesborough, J. E., Souza, J. M., Ertl, W. J., Tintle, S. M., Nanos, G. P., Valerio, I. L., et al. (2019) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0000000000003088 · Cited by 530
Els, C., Jackson, T. D., Kunyk, D., Lappi, V. G., Sonnenberg, B., Hagtvedt, R., Sharma, S., Kolahdooz, F., & Straube, S. (2017) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd012509.pub2 · Cited by 284
Metadata
- Authors
- Alviar, M. J. M., Hale, T., & Lim-Dungca, M.
- Venue
- Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-10-13
- Volume
- 2020
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- CD006380-CD006380
- ISSN
- 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
- 1465-1858
- OpenAlex
- W1697847974
- Cited by
- 279
- References
- 103
- FWCI
- 32.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pharmacologic interventions for treating phantom limb pain. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/14651858.cd006380.pub3
- The paper
- Alviar, M. J. M., Hale, T., & Lim-Dungca, M. (2016). Pharmacologic interventions for treating phantom limb pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.cd006380.pub3
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.