Somatosensory Rehabilitation for Neuropathic Pain in Burn Survivors
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Neuropathic pain is an enormous rehabilitation challenge that has a substantial negative effect on patient function and quality of life. Somatosensory rehabilitation is a novel, nonpharmacological intervention described by Spicher based on the neuroplasticity of the somatosensory system. The rationale for somatosensory rehabilitation is that treating hypoesthesia will decrease neuropathic pain. Particularly for those with established neuropathic pain, the hypoesthesia may be masked by mechanical allodynia, which must be treated before treating the underlying hyposensitive zone. This case series describes the outcome of 17 burn survivors treated with somatosensory rehabilitation for their neuropathic pain. Before initiating treatment a modified version of the McGill Pain Questionnaire-short form (Questionnaire de la douleur St. Antoine, QDSA) was completed with the patients. The total score (×/64) was converted to percentage. The mechanical allodynia was assessed with the Rainbow Pain Scale that uses touch with the 15-g Semmes Weinstein Monofilaments (SWMs) and that was rated as painful on the visual analog scale (3/10 or resting pain + 1/10), as the criteria for mechanical allodynia. The severity level was assessed using seven predetermined SWMs to identify the smallest that elicited pain. The treatment consisted of avoiding all touch in the allodynic zone while concurrently providing proximal sensory and vibratory counter stimulation. Once the mechanical allodynia was eliminated, the underlying hypoesthesia was treated. Hypoesthesia was evaluated with the SWMs, and the percent improvement from baseline was calculated. The sensory reeducation treatment for hypoesthesia consisted of touch discrimination, texture perception, and vibratory stimulation. Seventeen patients (71/29% male/female, 21 ± 25% TBSA burned, 486 ± 596 days postburn) were evaluated and treated. Of these 15 initially presented with mechanical allodynia. The SWM scores had improved by 27 ± 21% (n = 14) and 29 ± 26% (n = 12) at 2 and 3 months posttreatment, respectively. The QDSA scores had improved by 9 ± 14% (n = 8) and 23 ± 23% (n = 6) at 2 and 3 months posttreatment, respectively. There were two patients who initially presented with hypoesthesia and six who had their zone of hypoesthesia treated after the mechanical allodynia had resolved. For these eight patients, their ability to perceive light touch improved by 27 ± 17% (n = 8) and 35 ± 25% (n = 6) at 2 and 3 months postsensory reeducation treatment initiation, respectively. The QDSA improved by 9 and 50% for the two patients who initially presented with hypoesthesia. In this case series, the majority of patients (13/17 or 76%) showed substantial improvements after somatosensory rehabilitation suggesting this is a treatment approach that should be considered with burn survivors experiencing neuropathic pain. There is a need, however, for future controlled studies to further investigate this approach and to determine if there is a subpopulation of burn survivors that are more likely than others to benefit from this approach.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,034 | 0,021 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».