Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Jul 16;8(7):e021039.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-021039.

Phantom motor execution as a treatment for phantom limb pain: protocol of an international, double-blind, randomised controlled clinical trial

Affiliations

Phantom motor execution as a treatment for phantom limb pain: protocol of an international, double-blind, randomised controlled clinical trial

Eva Lendaro et al. BMJ Open. .

Abstract

Introduction: Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a chronic condition that can greatly diminish quality of life. Control over the phantom limb and exercise of such control have been hypothesised to reverse maladaptive brain changes correlated to PLP. Preliminary investigations have shown that decoding motor volition using myoelectric pattern recognition, while providing real-time feedback via virtual and augmented reality (VR-AR), facilitates phantom motor execution (PME) and reduces PLP. Here we present the study protocol for an international (seven countries), multicentre (nine clinics), double-blind, randomised controlled clinical trial to assess the effectiveness of PME in alleviating PLP.

Methods and analysis: Sixty-seven subjects suffering from PLP in upper or lower limbs are randomly assigned to PME or phantom motor imagery (PMI) interventions. Subjects allocated to either treatment receive 15 interventions and are exposed to the same VR-AR environments using the same device. The only difference between interventions is whether phantom movements are actually performed (PME) or just imagined (PMI). Complete evaluations are conducted at baseline and at intervention completion, as well as 1, 3 and 6 months later using an intention-to-treat (ITT) approach. Changes in PLP measured using the Pain Rating Index between the first and last session are the primary measure of efficacy. Secondary outcomes include: frequency, duration, quality of pain, intrusion of pain in activities of daily living and sleep, disability associated to pain, pain self-efficacy, frequency of depressed mood, presence of catastrophising thinking, health-related quality of life and clinically significant change as patient's own impression. Follow-up interviews are conducted up to 6 months after the treatment.

Ethics and dissemination: The study is performed in agreement with the Declaration of Helsinki and under approval by the governing ethical committees of each participating clinic. The results will be published according to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines in a peer-reviewed journal.

Trial registration number: NCT03112928; Pre-results.

Keywords: clinical trials; neurological pain; rehabilitation medicine.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: The sponsor of this study (Integrum AB) is a for-profit organisation that might commercialise the device used in this study (phantom motor execution and phantom motor imagery). MO-C was partially funded by Integrum AB. The core technology used in this study has been made freely available as open source by MO-C (machine learning, virtual reality and electronics).

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow diagram for the randomised controlled clinical trial. At least 67 patients are recruited and randomly allocated to either phantom motor execution (PME) or phantom motor imagery (PMI) interventions in allocation ratio 2:1. Following the completion of the treatment protocol and wash-out period of 6 months, it is possible for the patient to cross over to the parallel interventional arm, according to their will.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Schematic illustration of the clinical investigation device with all its components. Myoelectric signals are acquired though surface electrodes (A) by a myoelectric amplifier (B), electrically isolated (C). The signals are then processed by the software installed on the computer (D). The camera (E) films the participant and the recorded image is displayed on the monitor (F) with a virtual limb superimposed where the marker (G) is detected. Figure courtesy of Jason Millenaar.

References

    1. Dijkstra PU, Geertzen JH, Stewart R, et al. . Phantom pain and risk factors: a multivariate analysis. J Pain Symptom Manage 2002;24:578–85. - PubMed
    1. Clark RL, Bowling FL, Jepson F, et al. . Phantom limb pain after amputation in diabetic patients does not differ from that after amputation in nondiabetic patients. Pain 2013;154:729–32. 10.1016/j.pain.2013.01.009 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Nikolajsen L, Jensen TS, pain Plimb. Br J Anaesth 2001;87:107–16. - PubMed
    1. Batsford S, Ryan CG, Martin DJ. Non-pharmacological conservative therapy for phantom limb pain: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Physiother Theory Pract 2017;33:173–83. 10.1080/09593985.2017.1288283 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ortiz-Catalan M, Sander N, Kristoffersen MB, et al. . Treatment of phantom limb pain (PLP) based on augmented reality and gaming controlled by myoelectric pattern recognition: a case study of a chronic PLP patient. Front Neurosci 2014;8 10.3389/fnins.2014.00024 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Associated data