Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: Practical Diagnostic and Treatment Guidelines, 5th Edition.

R Norman Harden, Candida S McCabe, Andreas Goebel, Michael Massey, Tolga Suvar, Sharon Grieve, Stephen Bruehl
{"title":"Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: Practical Diagnostic and Treatment Guidelines, 5th Edition.","authors":"R Norman Harden, Candida S McCabe, Andreas Goebel, Michael Massey, Tolga Suvar, Sharon Grieve, Stephen Bruehl","doi":"10.1093/pm/pnac046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There have been some modest recent advancements in the research of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, yet the amount and quality of the work in this complicated multifactorial disease remains low (with some notable exceptions; e.g., the recent work on the dorsal root ganglion stimulation). The semi-systematic (though in some cases narrative) approach to review is necessary so that we might treat our patients while waiting for \"better research.\" This semi-systematic review was conducted by experts in the field, (deliberately) some of whom are promising young researchers supplemented by the experience of \"elder statesman\" researchers, who all mention the system they have used to examine the literature. What we found is generally low- to medium-quality research with small numbers of subjects; however, there are some recent exceptions to this. The primary reason for this paucity of research is the fact that this is a rare disease, and it is very difficult to acquire a sufficient sample size for statistical significance using traditional statistical approaches. Several larger trials have failed, probably due to using the broad general diagnostic criteria (the \"Budapest\" criteria) in a multifactorial/multi-mechanism disease. Responsive subsets can often be identified in these larger trials, but not sufficient to achieve statistically significant results in the general diagnostic grouping. This being the case the authors have necessarily included data from less compelling protocols, including trials such as case series and even in some instances case reports/empirical information. In the humanitarian spirit of treating our often desperate patients with this rare syndrome, without great evidence, we must take what data we can find (as in this work) and tailor a treatment regime for each patient.</p>","PeriodicalId":19909,"journal":{"name":"Pain Medicine: The Official Journal of the American Academy of Pain Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9186375/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pain Medicine: The Official Journal of the American Academy of Pain Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/pm/pnac046","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

There have been some modest recent advancements in the research of Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, yet the amount and quality of the work in this complicated multifactorial disease remains low (with some notable exceptions; e.g., the recent work on the dorsal root ganglion stimulation). The semi-systematic (though in some cases narrative) approach to review is necessary so that we might treat our patients while waiting for "better research." This semi-systematic review was conducted by experts in the field, (deliberately) some of whom are promising young researchers supplemented by the experience of "elder statesman" researchers, who all mention the system they have used to examine the literature. What we found is generally low- to medium-quality research with small numbers of subjects; however, there are some recent exceptions to this. The primary reason for this paucity of research is the fact that this is a rare disease, and it is very difficult to acquire a sufficient sample size for statistical significance using traditional statistical approaches. Several larger trials have failed, probably due to using the broad general diagnostic criteria (the "Budapest" criteria) in a multifactorial/multi-mechanism disease. Responsive subsets can often be identified in these larger trials, but not sufficient to achieve statistically significant results in the general diagnostic grouping. This being the case the authors have necessarily included data from less compelling protocols, including trials such as case series and even in some instances case reports/empirical information. In the humanitarian spirit of treating our often desperate patients with this rare syndrome, without great evidence, we must take what data we can find (as in this work) and tailor a treatment regime for each patient.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
复杂性区域疼痛综合征:实用诊断和治疗指南》,第 5 版。
最近,复杂性区域疼痛综合征的研究取得了一些微小的进展,但这种复杂的多因素疾病的研究数量和质量仍然很低(除了一些明显的例外,如最近关于刺激背根神经节的研究)。半系统性(尽管在某些情况下是叙述性的)的综述方法是必要的,这样我们才能在等待 "更好的研究 "的同时治疗我们的病人。这篇半系统性综述是由该领域的专家(有意为之)进行的,其中一些是很有前途的年轻研究人员,辅以 "老前辈 "研究人员的经验,他们都提到了自己用于研究文献的系统。我们发现,一般来说,研究质量处于中下水平,研究对象数量较少;不过,最近也有一些例外情况。研究数量少的主要原因是这是一种罕见疾病,使用传统的统计方法很难获得足够的样本量来达到统计学意义。可能是由于在一种多因素/多机制疾病中使用了宽泛的通用诊断标准("布达佩斯 "标准),几项规模较大的试验均告失败。在这些规模较大的试验中,往往能发现有反应的亚群,但不足以在一般诊断分组中取得有统计学意义的结果。在这种情况下,作者必然会将不太引人注目的方案中的数据纳入其中,包括病例系列等试验,甚至在某些情况下还包括病例报告/经验信息。在治疗这种罕见综合征的绝望患者时,我们必须本着人道主义精神,在没有大量证据的情况下,利用我们所能找到的数据(如本著作中的数据),为每位患者量身定制治疗方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
An Anatomy-Informed, Novel Technique for S1 Dorsal Root Ganglion Stimulation Lead Placement. Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: Practical Diagnostic and Treatment Guidelines, 5th Edition. Associations Between Resting Heart Rate, Resting Blood Pressure, Psychological Variables and Pain Processing in Chronic Whiplash-Associated Disorder: A Cross-Sectional Study Preferred Self-Administered Questionnaires to Assess Resilience, Optimism, Pain Acceptance, and Social Support in People with Pain: A Modified Delphi Study Erratum to: Health-Related Quality of Life among United States Service Members with Low Back Pain Receiving Usual Care plus Chiropractic Care vs Usual Care Alone: Secondary Outcomes of a Pragmatic Clinical Trial
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1