Modified graded motor imagery for complex regional pain syndrome type 1 of the upper extremity in the acute phase
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a pathologic condition in which the painful experience is disproportionate in time and intensity in comparison with the inciting event. At present, the pathophysiology of CRPS is not well understood. Several studies have indicated that cortical reorganization plays a role in the persistence of the symptoms. A new promising approach, graded motor imagery (GMI), seems to be effective, but there are limited data for the CRPS-1 upper extremity population. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the effectiveness of a modified GMI (mGMI) protocol based on the work of Moseley to reduce pain and enhance functional capacities for a population with nonchronic CRPS-1 of the upper extremity. The following outcome measures were used to assess the clinical effectiveness: pain (short form of the McGill Pain Questionnaire), grip force (Martin vigorimeter), perception of upper extremity function (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire), and patient's global impression of change. All outcomes at T4 were compared with the baseline data (T0) using the Mann-Whitney test and the χ test (nonparametric tests). Seven patients were recruited for the study. At the end of the mGMI (T4), we obtained significant results for the decrease in the pain experienced in the last 7 days (visual analog scale; P=0.046), improvement in the affected extremity grip force (P=0.042), and the patient's global impression of change (P=0.015). However, the data of the perception of upper extremity function (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire) were not clinically or statistically significant. Our results indicate that this mGMI protocol seems to be a promising therapeutic modality to reduce pain. However, more investigations are needed to determine whether mGMI has a significant impact on upper extremity function.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".