Effectiveness of mirror therapy on management of phantom limb pain and adjustment to limitation among prosthetic users; A single blinded randomized controlled trial

IF 1.2 Q3 REHABILITATION
Ayesha Noureen, Ashfaq Ahmad, Arooj Fatima, Syeda Nida Fatima
{"title":"Effectiveness of mirror therapy on management of phantom limb pain and adjustment to limitation among prosthetic users; A single blinded randomized controlled trial","authors":"Ayesha Noureen,&nbsp;Ashfaq Ahmad,&nbsp;Arooj Fatima,&nbsp;Syeda Nida Fatima","doi":"10.1016/j.jbmt.2024.12.007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To determine the effectiveness of conventional physical therapy with and without mirror therapy on phantom limb pain and improving adjustment to limitation among prosthetic users.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Single blinded Randomized controlled trial.</div></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><div>University of Lahore Teaching Hospital (UOLTH), Lahore.</div></div><div><h3>Subjects</h3><div>Study enrolled 36 unilateral lower limb amputees diagnosed with PLP with pain intensity of minimum 3 on Numeric Rating Scale (NRS).</div></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><div>Participants received treatment based on the level of amputation and respective assessment. Group A received four weeks of mirror therapy followed by routine physical therapy while Group B received routine physical therapy only including strengthening, stretching, isometric exercise.</div></div><div><h3>Main measures</h3><div>Severity of Phantom limb Pain was measured with Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) while The Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scale (TAPES) assessed the limitation in daily life. Measurements were taken at baseline, at the end of 2nd and 4th week.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among total, 18 patients received mirror therapy along with routine physical therapy and 18 received routine physical therapy alone. The mean (S.D) age of participants in Group-I was 35.22 ± 6.33 while in Group-II was 36.33 ± 6.30.At baseline, both groups (experimental and control group) were comparable for both NPRS (6.17 ± 1.80 and 6.33 ± 1.74) and Adjustment to limitation on TAPES scale (12.78 ± 4.36 and 11.72 ± 3.69). MT along with routine physical therapy significantly reduced the intensity of PLP at the end of 4th week (2.27 ± 1.17 and 4 ± 1.37). While on TAPES observable changes were recorded in Adjustment to limitation (19.67 ± 2.54 and 16.00 ± 3.97).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Mirror Therapy as an additional approach along with routine physical therapy over four weeks was more effective than conventional therapy only in managing severity of PLP and significantly improved adjustment to limitation.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51431,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF BODYWORK AND MOVEMENT THERAPIES","volume":"42 ","pages":"Pages 236-242"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF BODYWORK AND MOVEMENT THERAPIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1360859224005606","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

To determine the effectiveness of conventional physical therapy with and without mirror therapy on phantom limb pain and improving adjustment to limitation among prosthetic users.

Design

Single blinded Randomized controlled trial.

Setting

University of Lahore Teaching Hospital (UOLTH), Lahore.

Subjects

Study enrolled 36 unilateral lower limb amputees diagnosed with PLP with pain intensity of minimum 3 on Numeric Rating Scale (NRS).

Interventions

Participants received treatment based on the level of amputation and respective assessment. Group A received four weeks of mirror therapy followed by routine physical therapy while Group B received routine physical therapy only including strengthening, stretching, isometric exercise.

Main measures

Severity of Phantom limb Pain was measured with Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) while The Trinity Amputation and Prosthesis Experience Scale (TAPES) assessed the limitation in daily life. Measurements were taken at baseline, at the end of 2nd and 4th week.

Results

Among total, 18 patients received mirror therapy along with routine physical therapy and 18 received routine physical therapy alone. The mean (S.D) age of participants in Group-I was 35.22 ± 6.33 while in Group-II was 36.33 ± 6.30.At baseline, both groups (experimental and control group) were comparable for both NPRS (6.17 ± 1.80 and 6.33 ± 1.74) and Adjustment to limitation on TAPES scale (12.78 ± 4.36 and 11.72 ± 3.69). MT along with routine physical therapy significantly reduced the intensity of PLP at the end of 4th week (2.27 ± 1.17 and 4 ± 1.37). While on TAPES observable changes were recorded in Adjustment to limitation (19.67 ± 2.54 and 16.00 ± 3.97).

Conclusion

Mirror Therapy as an additional approach along with routine physical therapy over four weeks was more effective than conventional therapy only in managing severity of PLP and significantly improved adjustment to limitation.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
133
审稿时长
321 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Bodywork and Movement Therapies brings you the latest therapeutic techniques and current professional debate. Publishing highly illustrated articles on a wide range of subjects this journal is immediately relevant to everyday clinical practice in private, community and primary health care settings. Techiques featured include: • Physical Therapy • Osteopathy • Chiropractic • Massage Therapy • Structural Integration • Feldenkrais • Yoga Therapy • Dance • Physiotherapy • Pilates • Alexander Technique • Shiatsu and Tuina
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信