The impact of mirror therapy on body schema perception in patients with complex regional pain syndrome after distal radius fractures

Abstract

Introduction:

Mirror therapy requires a minimum of equipment, is relatively simple to perform and effective for various pathological conditions. The effect of mirror therapy on body schema disturbances registered in complex regional pain syndrome type I (CRPS I) patients has not yet been determined.

Methods:

The study is based on the analysis of the treatment results of 30 patients with CRPS I, developed as a result of the distal radius fractures, with help of mirror therapy together with exercise therapy and medications. The control group consisted of 20 patients with CRPS I developed as a result of the distal radius fractures treated only with exercise therapy and medications. We evaluated the results before the treatment, after 3 days and after 6 weeks of treatment according to The Bath CRPS Body Perception Disturbance Scale.

Results:

A total of 83.33% patients experienced the positive effect of mirror therapy on the perception of the ‘body schema’ after 6 weeks of treatment, and 35% underwent standard treatment without mirror therapy. The positive effect was statistically significant for the first five points of the Bath scale after 6 weeks of treatment compared to the control group. Improvements observed in some patients after 3 days of treatment were less pronounced and statistically insignificant.

Conclusion:

Mirror therapy can improve the perception of the body schema as an element of integrated treatment of CRPS I developed after fractures of the distal radius less than 3 years duration.

Keywords

Musculoskeletal pain pain perception complex regional pain syndromes somatoform disorders somatosensory disorders reflex sympathetic dystrophy body perception

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Yucha

Montgomery

Evidence-based practice in biofeedback and neurofeedback. Wheat Ridge, CO: Association for Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 2008.

Ezendam

Bongers

Jannin

MJA

. Systematic review of the effectiveness of mirror therapy in upper extremity function. Disabil Rehabil 2009; 31(26): 2135–2149.

Cacchio

De Blasis

Necozione

et al . Mirror therapy for chronic complex regional pain syndrome type 1 and stroke. N Engl J Med 2009; 361(6): 634–636.

Selles

Schreuders

TAR

Stam

HJ.

Mirror therapy in patients with causalgia (complex regional pain syndrome type II) following peripheral nerve injury: two cases. J Rehabil Med 2008; 40: 312–314.

Pervane

Nakipoglu

YGF

Sezgin

et al . Effects of mirror therapy in stroke patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1: a randomized controlled study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2016; 97(4): 575–581.

Al Sayegh

Filén

Johansson

. Mirror therapy for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) – a literature review and an illustrative case report. Scand J Pain 2013; 4(4): 200–207.

Lewis

Kersten

McCabe

et al . Body perception disturbance: a contribution to pain in complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Pain 2007; 133(1–3): 111–119.

Haggard

Wolpert

. Disorders of body schema. In: Leiguarda

(ed.) Higher-order motor disorders: from neuroanatomy and neurobiology to clinical neurology. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005, pp. 261–271.

Maihöfner

Handwerker

Neundörfer

et al . Cortical reorganization during recovery from complex regional pain syndrome. Neurology 2004; 63(4): 693–701.

10.

Pleger

Tegenthoff

Ragert

et al . Sensorimotor retuning in complex regional pain syndrome parallels pain reduction. Ann Neurol 2005; 57(3): 425–429.

11.

Juottonen

Gockel

Silen

et al . Altered central sensorimotor processing in patients with complex regional pain syndrome. Pain 2002; 98: 315–323.

12.

Pleger

Rager

Schwenkreis

et al . Patterns of cortical reorganization parallel impaired tactile discrimination and pain intensity in complex regional pain syndrome. Neuroimage 2006; 32(2): 503–510.

13.

Graziano

MSA

Botvinick

. How the brain represents the body: insights from neurophysiology and psychology. In: Prinz

Hommel

(eds) Common mechanisms in perception and action. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002, pp. 136–157.

14.

Lewis

McCabe

CS.

Body perception disturbance (BPD) in CRPS: current and emerging therapeutic approaches including desensitization techniques and mirror visual feedback, together with the introduction of a new clinical tool for the early identification of BPD. Pract Pain Manag 2010; 10(3): 60–66.

15.

Forderreuther

Sailer

Straube

Impaired self-perception of the hand in complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Pain 2004; 110: 756–761.

16.

Priganc

Stralka

SW.

Graded motor imagery. J Hand Ther 2011; 24(2): 164–168.

17.

Moseley

McCormick

Hudson

et al . Disrupted cortical proprioceptive representation evokes symptoms of peculiarity, foreignness and swelling, but not pain. Rheumatology 2006; 45(2): 196–200.

18.

McCabe

Haigh

Halligan

et al . Simulating sensory–motor incongruence in healthy volunteers: implications for a cortical model of pain. Rheumatology 2005; 44(4): 509–516.

19.

McCabe

Haigh

Halligan

et al . Distorting proprioception in chronic pain patients exacerbates sensory disturbances – implications for pathology. Rheumatology 2003; 42(4): 145.

20.

McCabe

Haigh

Ring

et al . A controlled pilot study of the utility of mirror visual feedback in the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome (type 1). Rheumatology 2003; 42(1): 97–101.

21.

Bultitude

Rafal

RD.

Derangement of body representation in complex regional pain syndrome: report of a case treated with mirror and prisms. Exp Brain Res 2010; 204(3): 409–418.

22.

Giraux

Sirigu

Illusory movements of the paralyzed limb restore motor cortex activity. Neuroimage 2003; 20: S107–S111.

23.

Velasco

Carrillo-Ruiz

Castro

et al . Motor cortex electrical stimulation applied to patients with complex regional pain syndrome. Pain 2009; 147(1–3): 91–98.

24.

Son

Kim

Moon

et al . Motor cortex stimulation in a patient with intractable complex regional pain syndrome type II with hemibody involvement. J Neurosurg 2003; 98(1): 175–179.