Back to Journals » Journal of Pain Research » Volume 10

A review of the management of phantom limb pain: challenges and solutions

Authors Richardson C, Kulkarni J

Received 30 May 2017

Accepted for publication 4 July 2017

Published 7 August 2017 Volume 2017:10 Pages 1861—1870

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S124664

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewers approved by Dr Amy Norman

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Michael Schatman

Cliff Richardson,1 Jai Kulkarni2

1University of Manchester, Division of Nursing Midwifery and Social Work, Manchester, UK, 2Specialized Ability Centre (Manchester), University Hospitals of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK

Background: Phantom limb pain (PLP) occurs in 50% and 80% of amputees. Although it is often classified as a neuropathic pain, few of the large-scale trials of treatments for neuropathic pain included sufficient numbers of PLP sufferers to have confidence that they are effective in this condition. Many therapies have been administered to amputees with PLP over the years; however, as of yet, there appears to be no first-line treatment.
Objectives: To comprehensively review the literature on treatment modalities for PLP and to identify the challenges currently faced by clinicians dealing with this pain.
Method: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, Cochrane and psycINFO databases were searched using “Phantom limb” initially as a MeSH term to identify treatments that had been tried. Then, a secondary search combining phantom limb with each treatment was performed to find papers specific to each therapy. Each paper was assessed for its research strength using the GRADE system.
Results: Thirty-eight therapies were identified. Overall, the quality of evidence was low. There was one high-quality study which used repetitive transcutaneous magnetic stimulation and found a statistical reduction in pain at day 15 but no difference at day 30. Significant results from single studies of moderate level quality were available for gabapentin, ketamine and morphine; however, there was a risk of bias in these papers. Mirror therapy and associated techniques were assessed through two systematic reviews, which conclude that there is insufficient evidence to support their use.
Conclusion: No decisions can be made for the first-line management of PLP, as the level of evidence is too low. Robust studies on homogeneous populations, an understanding of what amputees consider a meaningful reduction in PLP and agreement of whether pain intensity is the legitimate therapeutic target are urgently required.

Keywords: phantom limb pain, review, treatment, pain

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]

 

Other article by this author:

A study to assess the feasibility of undertaking a randomized controlled trial of adherence with eye drops in glaucoma patients

Richardson C, Brunton L, Olleveant N, Henson DB, Pilling M, Mottershead J, Fenerty CH, Spencer AF, Waterman H

Patient Preference and Adherence 2013, 7:1025-1039

Published Date: 7 October 2013