↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

A review of the management of phantom limb pain: challenges and solutions

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Pain Research, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (81st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
69 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
234 Mendeley
Title
A review of the management of phantom limb pain: challenges and solutions
Published in
Journal of Pain Research, August 2017
DOI 10.2147/jpr.s124664
Pubmed ID
Authors

Cliff Richardson, Jai Kulkarni

Abstract

Phantom limb pain (PLP) occurs in 50% and 80% of amputees. Although it is often classified as a neuropathic pain, few of the large-scale trials of treatments for neuropathic pain included sufficient numbers of PLP sufferers to have confidence that they are effective in this condition. Many therapies have been administered to amputees with PLP over the years; however, as of yet, there appears to be no first-line treatment. To comprehensively review the literature on treatment modalities for PLP and to identify the challenges currently faced by clinicians dealing with this pain. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, Cochrane and psycINFO databases were searched using "Phantom limb" initially as a MeSH term to identify treatments that had been tried. Then, a secondary search combining phantom limb with each treatment was performed to find papers specific to each therapy. Each paper was assessed for its research strength using the GRADE system. Thirty-eight therapies were identified. Overall, the quality of evidence was low. There was one high-quality study which used repetitive transcutaneous magnetic stimulation and found a statistical reduction in pain at day 15 but no difference at day 30. Significant results from single studies of moderate level quality were available for gabapentin, ketamine and morphine; however, there was a risk of bias in these papers. Mirror therapy and associated techniques were assessed through two systematic reviews, which conclude that there is insufficient evidence to support their use. No decisions can be made for the first-line management of PLP, as the level of evidence is too low. Robust studies on homogeneous populations, an understanding of what amputees consider a meaningful reduction in PLP and agreement of whether pain intensity is the legitimate therapeutic target are urgently required.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 234 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 234 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 41 18%
Student > Master 25 11%
Researcher 18 8%
Other 17 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 14 6%
Other 32 14%
Unknown 87 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 51 22%
Nursing and Health Professions 31 13%
Neuroscience 19 8%
Psychology 10 4%
Engineering 8 3%
Other 16 7%
Unknown 99 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 April 2018.
All research outputs
#3,589,291
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Pain Research
#398
of 1,969 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#61,436
of 328,005 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Pain Research
#18
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,969 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,005 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.