scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Brienne Costa

Bio: Brienne Costa is an academic researcher from Valley Hospital. The author has contributed to research in topics: Evidence-based medicine & Complex regional pain syndrome. The author has an hindex of 3, co-authored 3 publications receiving 437 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The fourth edition of diagnostic and treatment guidelines for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS; aka reflex sympathetic dystrophy) is presented in this paper, where expert practitioners in each discipline traditionally utilized in the treatment of CRPS systematically reviewed the available and relevant literature; due to the paucity of levels 1 and 2 studies, less rigorous, preliminary research reports were included.
Abstract: Objective This is the fourth edition of diagnostic and treatment guidelines for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS; aka reflex sympathetic dystrophy). Methods Expert practitioners in each discipline traditionally utilized in the treatment of CRPS systematically reviewed the available and relevant literature; due to the paucity of levels 1 and 2 studies, less rigorous, preliminary research reports were included. The literature review was supplemented with knowledge gained from extensive empirical clinical experience, particularly in areas where high-quality evidence to guide therapy is lacking. Results The research quality, clinical relevance, and “state of the art” of diagnostic criteria or treatment modalities are discussed, sometimes in considerable detail with an eye to the expert practitioner in each therapeutic area. Levels of evidence are mentioned when available, so that the practitioner can better assess and analyze the modality under discussion, and if desired, to personally consider the citations. Tables provide details on characteristics of studies in different subject domains described in the literature. Conclusions In the humanitarian spirit of making the most of all current thinking in the area, balanced by a careful case-by-case analysis of the risk/cost vs benefit analysis, the authors offer these “practical” guidelines.

408 citations

01 Jan 2016
TL;DR: This is the fourth edition of diagnostic and treatment guidelines for complex regional pain syndrome, and in the humanitarian spirit of making the most of all current thinking in the area, balanced by a careful case-by-case analysis of the risk/cost vs benefit analysis.
Abstract: ¶¶ Abstract Objective. This is the fourth edition of diagno- stic and treatment guidelines for complex regi- onal pain syndrome (CRPS; aka reflex sympathetic dystrophy).

72 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors explore and develop the rationale for making functional restoration the pivotal treatment algorithm in the management of complex regional pain syndrome, around which all other treatments, such as psychotherapy, drugs, and interventions, revolve.
Abstract: In this review, the authors discuss the development of consensus-based treatment guidelines in 1997. They also synthesize the recommendations of a closed workshop held in Budapest in late 2004 that reexamined these treatment guidelines and made further and more detailed recommendations. They explore and develop the rationale for making functional restoration the pivotal treatment algorithm in the management of complex regional pain syndrome, around which all other treatments, such as psychotherapy, drugs, and interventions, revolve. The authors discuss in detail the process of functional restoration and the modalities appropriate to accomplishing that--specifically, the role of the occupational therapist, physical therapist, recreational therapist, and vocational rehabilitation specialist. Medications, interventions, and psychotherapy will be covered in other sections of this series.

69 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Neuromodulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC) of the International Neurodulation Society evaluated evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of neurostimulation to treat chronic pain, chronic critical limb ischemia, and refractory angina and recommended appropriate clinical applications.
Abstract: Introduction: The Neuromodulation Appropriateness Consensus Committee (NACC) of the International Neuromodulation Society (INS) evaluated evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of neurostimulation to treat chronic pain, chronic critical limb ischemia, and refractory angina and recommended appropriate clinical applications. Methods: The NACC used literature reviews, expert opinion, clinical experience, and individual research. Authors consulted the Practice Parameters for the Use of Spinal Cord Stimulation in the Treatment of Neuropathic Pain (2006), systematic reviews (1984 to 2013), and prospective and randomized controlled trials (2005 to 2013) identified through PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar. Results: Neurostimulation is relatively safe because of its minimally invasive and reversible characteristics. Comparison with medical management is difficult, as patients considered for neurostimulation have failed conservative management. Unlike alternative therapies, neurostimulation is not associated with medication-related side effects and has enduring effect. Device-related complications are not uncommon; however, the incidence is becoming less frequent as technology progresses and surgical skills improve. Randomized controlled studies support the efficacy of spinal cord stimulation in treating failed back surgery syndrome and complex regional pain syndrome. Similar studies of neurostimulation for peripheral neuropathic pain, postamputation pain, postherpetic neuralgia, and other causes of nerve injury are needed. International guidelines recommend spinal cord stimulation to treat refractory angina; other indications, such as congestive heart failure, are being investigated. Conclusions: Appropriate neurostimulation is safe and effective in some chronic pain conditions. Technological refinements and clinical evidence will continue to expand its use. The NACC seeks to facilitate the efficacy and safety of neurostimulation.

399 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is concluded that further research is needed into each of the therapeutic modalities discussed in the guidelines for treatment of CRPS-I, because of the extent of evidence found for therapeutic interventions found.
Abstract: Treatment of complex regional pain syndrome type I (CRPS-I) is subject to discussion. The purpose of this study was to develop multidisciplinary guidelines for treatment of CRPS-I. A multidisciplinary task force graded literature evaluating treatment effects for CRPS-I according to their strength of evidence, published between 1980 to June 2005. Treatment recommendations based on the literature findings were formulated and formally approved by all Dutch professional associations involved in CRPS-I treatment. For pain treatment, the WHO analgesic ladder is advised with the exception of strong opioids. For neuropathic pain, anticonvulsants and tricyclic antidepressants may be considered. For inflammatory symptoms, free-radical scavengers (dimethylsulphoxide or acetylcysteine) are advised. To promote peripheral blood flow, vasodilatory medication may be considered. Percutaneous sympathetic blockades may be used to increase blood flow in case vasodilatory medication has insufficient effect. To decrease functional limitations, standardised physiotherapy and occupational therapy are advised. To prevent the occurrence of CRPS-I after wrist fractures, vitamin C is recommended. Adequate perioperative analgesia, limitation of operating time, limited use of tourniquet, and use of regional anaesthetic techniques are recommended for secondary prevention of CRPS-I. Based on the literature identified and the extent of evidence found for therapeutic interventions for CRPS-I, we conclude that further research is needed into each of the therapeutic modalities discussed in the guidelines.

311 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
29 Jul 2015-BMJ
TL;DR: Reviews of available randomized trials suggest that physical and occupational therapy, bisphosphonates, calcitonin, subanesthetic intravenous ketamine, free radical scavengers, oral corticosteroids, and spinal cord stimulation may be effective treatments.
Abstract: Complex regional pain syndrome is a chronic pain condition characterized by autonomic and inflammatory features. It occurs acutely in about 7% of patients who have limb fractures, limb surgery, or other injuries. Many cases resolve within the first year, with a smaller subset progressing to the chronic form. This transition is often paralleled by a change from “warm complex regional pain syndrome,” with inflammatory characteristics dominant, to “cold complex regional pain syndrome” in which autonomic features dominate. Multiple peripheral and central mechanisms seem to be involved, the relative contributions of which may differ between individuals and over time. Possible contributors include peripheral and central sensitization, autonomic changes and sympatho-afferent coupling, inflammatory and immune alterations, brain changes, and genetic and psychological factors. The syndrome is diagnosed purely on the basis of clinical signs and symptoms. Effective management of the chronic form of the syndrome is often challenging. Few high quality randomized controlled trials are available to support the efficacy of the most commonly used interventions. Reviews of available randomized trials suggest that physical and occupational therapy (including graded motor imagery and mirror therapy), bisphosphonates, calcitonin, subanesthetic intravenous ketamine, free radical scavengers, oral corticosteroids, and spinal cord stimulation may be effective treatments. Multidisciplinary clinical care, which centers around functionally focused therapies is recommended. Other interventions are used to facilitate engagement in functional therapies and to improve quality of life.

242 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A detailed critical overview of not only the history of CRPS, but also the epidemiology, the clinical features, the pathophysiological studies, the proposed criteria, the therapy and an emphasis that future research should apply more rigorous standards to allow a better understanding ofCRPS are provided.

176 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The limited data available do not suggest that LASB is effective for reducing pain in CRPS, and there remains a scarcity of published evidence and a lack of high quality evidence to support or refute the use of local anaesthetic sympathetic blockade for CRPS.
Abstract: Background This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2005, Issue 4 (and last updated in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2013 issue 8), on local anaesthetic blockade (LASB) of the sympathetic chain to treat people with complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Objectives To assess the efficacy of LASB for the treatment of pain in CRPS and to evaluate the incidence of adverse effects of the procedure. Search methods For this update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), LILACS (Birme), conference abstracts of the World Congresses of the International Association for the Study of Pain, and various clinical trial registers up to September 2015. We also searched bibliographies from retrieved articles for additional studies. Selection criteria We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated the effect of sympathetic blockade with local anaesthetics in children or adults with CRPS compared to placebo, no treatment, or alternative treatments. Data collection and analysis We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. The outcomes of interest were reduction in pain intensity, the proportion who achieved moderate or substantial pain relief, the duration of pain relief, and the presence of adverse effects in each treatment arm. We assessed the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) and created a 'Summary of findings' table. Main results We included an additional four studies (N = 154) in this update. For this update, we excluded studies that did not follow up patients for more than 48 hours. As a result, we excluded four studies from the previous review in this update. Overall we included 12 studies (N = 461), all of which we judged to be at high or unclear risk of bias. Overall, the quality of evidence was low to very low, downgraded due to limitations, inconsistency, imprecision, indirectness, or a combination of these. Two small studies compared LASB to placebo/sham (N = 32). They did not demonstrate significant short-term benefit for LASB for pain intensity (moderate quality evidence). One small study (N = 36) at high risk of bias compared thoracic sympathetic block with corticosteroid and local anaesthetic versus injection of the same agents into the subcutaneous space, reporting statistically significant and clinically important differences in pain intensity at one-year follow-up but not at short term follow-up (very low quality evidence). Of two studies that investigated LASB as an addition to rehabilitation treatment, the only study that reported pain outcomes demonstrated no additional benefit from LASB (very low quality evidence). Eight small randomised studies compared sympathetic blockade to various other active interventions. Most studies found no difference in pain outcomes between sympathetic block versus other active treatments (low to very low quality evidence). One small study compared ultrasound-guided LASB with non-guided LASB and found no clinically important difference in pain outcomes (very low quality evidence). Six studies reported adverse events, all with minor effects reported. Authors' conclusions This update's results are similar to the previous versions of this systematic review, and the main conclusions are unchanged. There remains a scarcity of published evidence and a lack of high quality evidence to support or refute the use of local anaesthetic sympathetic blockade for CRPS. From the existing evidence, it is not possible to draw firm conclusions regarding the efficacy or safety of this intervention, but the limited data available do not suggest that LASB is effective for reducing pain in CRPS.

174 citations