The Value of Interdisciplinary Pain Management in Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Type I: A Prospective Outcome Study
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type I is a symptom complex of severe, chronic limb pain, often associated with allodynia, vasomotor, and sudomotor changes. Optimal management of this condition is not well understood. The role of a traditional, comprehensive pain management program with long-term follow-up has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE: To define the benefit of the interdisciplinary approach in patients with CRPS type I. DESIGN: Prospective, case series, outcomes evaluation. METHODS: Patients with a diagnosis of CRPS type I entering the University Pain Center's intensive, outpatient pain management program were enrolled in an objective assessment study through the duration of the program, with a follow-up of 2 years. This program involved 4 weeks of interdisciplinary management comprised of 20 sessions of physical therapy, 20 sessions of occupational therapy, 12 sessions of water therapy, 20 sessions of group psychotherapy, stellate ganglion blocks, and drug therapy. OUTCOME MEASURES: Specific objective measurements of upper extremity function, sensation and strength over time, and functional status 2 years after program completion. RESULTS: Upper extremity weight tolerance increased dramatically by 29-pounds (p<0.05). Function improved, with a 35 inch-pound gain in BTE (Baltimore Therapeutic Equipment) extension (p<0.005) and a 50 inch-pound increase in flexion (p<0.02). Jebsen-Taylor multifunctional testing (fine and gross motor skills) normalized from 72 to 48 seconds (p<0.04). Stable anxiety levels despite increased patient effort implied improved pain tolerance. At the 2-year follow up, 75% of the patients were employed. CONCLUSION: Patients with CRPS type I may benefit from a 4-week outpatient pain management program emphasizing rehabilitation.
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In general, it is common in CRPS interdisciplinary studies not to find much change in pain intensity, but rather in function.
“In general, it is common in CRPS interdisciplinary studies not to find much change in pain intensity, but rather in function [6, 7].”
From Symptom reduction and improved function in chronic CRPS type 1 after 12-week integrated, interdisciplinary therapy (2019) · cites this paper as [6]
The Discussion reports no significant decrease in pain level while physical gains increased, supporting the pain-versus-function contrast. But this was a small study of 12 patients; it does not establish that this pattern is common across CRPS interdisciplinary studies. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredAn interdisciplinary treatment is widely accepted for CRPS patient rehabilitation, but the content varies.
“An interdisciplinary treatment is widely accepted for CRPS patient rehabilitation, but the content varies [5-7].”
From Symptom reduction and improved function in chronic CRPS type 1 after 12-week integrated, interdisciplinary therapy (2019) · cites this paper as [6]
In a previous prospective study of 12 CRPS type 1 patients, a 4-week interdisciplinary, multimodal pain management program resulted in significant improvements in upper extremity motor functioning, no significant decrease in pain intensity, no significant change in psychological variables, and positive patient rating for benefit.
“Results showed significant improvements in upper extremity motor functioning, while decrease in pain intensity was not significant. There was likewise no significant change in psychological variables, but the patient rating for benefit was positive [6].”
From Symptom reduction and improved function in chronic CRPS type 1 after 12-week integrated, interdisciplinary therapy (2019) · cites this paper as [6]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 12 · Cited by 45
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Turk D, Melzack R. Handbook of pain as- sessment. Guilford Press, New York, 1992.
- Penzien DB: The pain locus of control scale. In Proceedings of the Eighth Annu- al Scientific Meeting of the American Pain Society. 1989; 68-72
- Suttenfield C. Fear of pain: A cognitive model for the development and mainte- nance of chronic pain behavior. Doctor- al Dissertation. George Mason University Fairfax, VA, 1995.
- Authors
- Chelimsky, T. C.
- Affiliations
- University Hospitals of Cleveland (US)
- Corresponding author
- Chelimsky, Thomas C.
- ORCID
- Chelimsky, Thomas C.
- Venue
- Pain Physician
- Published
- 2004-04-14
- Volume
- 2;7
- Issue
- 4;2
- Pages
- 203-209
- ISSN
- 1533-3159 (ISSN-L)
- 2150-1149
- OpenAlex
- W2149997524
- Cited by
- 45
- References
- 12
- Citations by year
- 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 1.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Pain Physician (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Treatment
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Nerve Injury and Rehabilitation
- Keywords
- complex regional pain syndrome type I, multidisciplinary pain management, allodynia, stellate ganglion block, physiotherapy, occupational therapy, aquatic therapy, group therapy, upper limb function, pain tolerance, employment effects, long-term follow-up
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