Evaluating Mirror Therapy Protocols in Phantom Limb Pain Clinical Trials: A Scoping Review.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of Pain Research Pub Date : 2025-02-07 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JPR.S502541
Katleho Limakatso, Eithne McGowan, Max Ortiz-Catalan
{"title":"Evaluating Mirror Therapy Protocols in Phantom Limb Pain Clinical Trials: A Scoping Review.","authors":"Katleho Limakatso, Eithne McGowan, Max Ortiz-Catalan","doi":"10.2147/JPR.S502541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mirror therapy is among the most widely used treatments for phantom limb pain. However, discrepancies exist in the way it is conducted, and its effectiveness varies widely. The aim of this scoping review was to evaluate the application of mirror therapy across the literature and to identify treatment features unique to studies with clinically significant pain reduction outcomes. Articles published until July 2024 were identified through a systematic search of the following electronic databases: Medline (via EBSCOhost), PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, PsycINFO (via EBSCOhost), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (via EBSCOhost), Africa-Wide Information (via EBSCOhost), and Scopus. Two reviewers independently conducted the screening of titles and abstracts, review of full-text articles, and data extraction. The results were analyzed descriptively. We included 32 studies in this review, 21 of which were deemed effective for achieving clinically significant pain reduction of 50% or 2 points on a 0-10 scale. There were inconsistencies in various treatment components including treatment setting, type of pre-treatment education, treatment technique, method of exercise delivery, treatment duration, and frequency of treatment sessions. Despite identifying common treatment features across studies with clinically significant pain reduction outcomes, we found no evidence of unanimous consensus in the literature towards any specific protocol for mirror therapy. Establishing a standardized treatment protocol could enhance the reliability and reproducibility of treatment outcomes in future studies and ensure a meaningful comparison between mirror therapy and other treatments in clinical trials and meta-analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":16661,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain Research","volume":"18 ","pages":"619-629"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11812563/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S502541","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Mirror therapy is among the most widely used treatments for phantom limb pain. However, discrepancies exist in the way it is conducted, and its effectiveness varies widely. The aim of this scoping review was to evaluate the application of mirror therapy across the literature and to identify treatment features unique to studies with clinically significant pain reduction outcomes. Articles published until July 2024 were identified through a systematic search of the following electronic databases: Medline (via EBSCOhost), PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, PsycINFO (via EBSCOhost), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (via EBSCOhost), Africa-Wide Information (via EBSCOhost), and Scopus. Two reviewers independently conducted the screening of titles and abstracts, review of full-text articles, and data extraction. The results were analyzed descriptively. We included 32 studies in this review, 21 of which were deemed effective for achieving clinically significant pain reduction of 50% or 2 points on a 0-10 scale. There were inconsistencies in various treatment components including treatment setting, type of pre-treatment education, treatment technique, method of exercise delivery, treatment duration, and frequency of treatment sessions. Despite identifying common treatment features across studies with clinically significant pain reduction outcomes, we found no evidence of unanimous consensus in the literature towards any specific protocol for mirror therapy. Establishing a standardized treatment protocol could enhance the reliability and reproducibility of treatment outcomes in future studies and ensure a meaningful comparison between mirror therapy and other treatments in clinical trials and meta-analyses.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pain Research
Journal of Pain Research CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
411
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Pain Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that welcomes laboratory and clinical findings in the fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Original research, reviews, symposium reports, hypothesis formation and commentaries are all considered for publication. Additionally, the journal now welcomes the submission of pain-policy-related editorials and commentaries, particularly in regard to ethical, regulatory, forensic, and other legal issues in pain medicine, and to the education of pain practitioners and researchers.
×
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