Overview of Reviews

You have free access to this content

Interventions for treating pain and disability in adults with complex regional pain syndrome- an overview of systematic reviews

  1. Neil E O'Connell1,*,
  2. Benedict M Wand2,
  3. James McAuley3,
  4. Louise Marston4,
  5. G Lorimer Moseley5

Editorial Group: Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Group

Published Online: 30 APR 2013

Assessed as up-to-date: 1 MAR 2013

DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009416.pub2


How to Cite

O'Connell NE, Wand BM, McAuley J, Marston L, Moseley GL. Interventions for treating pain and disability in adults with complex regional pain syndrome- an overview of systematic reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2013, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD009416. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009416.pub2.

Author Information

  1. 1

    Brunel University, Centre for Research in Rehabilitation, School of Health Sciences and Social Care, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK

  2. 2

    The University of Notre Dame Australia, School of Physiotherapy, Fremantle, W, Australia

  3. 3

    Neuroscience Research Australia, Moseley Group, Randwick, New South Wales, Australia

  4. 4

    University College London, Research Department of Primary Care & Population Health, London, UK

  5. 5

    University of South Australia, School of Health Sciences, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia

*Neil E O'Connell, Centre for Research in Rehabilitation, School of Health Sciences and Social Care, Brunel University, Kingston Lane, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UB8 3PH, UK. neil.oconnell@brunel.ac.uk.

Publication History

  1. Publication Status: Edited (no change to conclusions)
  2. Published Online: 30 APR 2013

SEARCH

[Figure 1]
Figure 1. Study flow diagram.
[Figure 2]
Figure 2. Effect sizes for RCTs of bisphosphonates versus placebo (immediate post-treatment period).
[Figure 3]
Figure 3. Meta-analysis using SMD of pain VAS scores for studies of ketamine identified in the review by Collins 2011.
[Figure 4]
Figure 4. Meta-analysis using mean difference of pain VAS scores for studies of ketamine identified in the review by Collins 2011.
[Figure 5]
Figure 5. Mean difference calculated for the trial of tadalafil versus placebo (Groeneweg 2008).
[Figure 6]
Figure 6. Physiotherapy (PT) versus social work (SW). Outcome: pain (0-100 VAS). Data extracted by hand from graphical format (Oerlemans 1999a).
[Figure 7]
Figure 7. Occupational therapy (OT) versus social work (SW). Outcome: pain (0-100 VAS). Data extracted by hand from graphical format (Oerlemans 1999a).
[Figure 8]
Figure 8. Physiotherapy (PT) versus social work (SW). Outcome: impairment (0-50 scale). Data extracted by hand from graphical format (Oerlemans 1999).
[Figure 9]
Figure 9. Occupational therapy (OT) versus social work (SW). Outcome: impairment (0-50 scale). Data extracted by hand from graphical format (Oerlemans 1999).
[Figure 10]
Figure 10. Meta-analysis of GMI programmes versus usual care for pain. Outcome 0-100 VAS. Immediate post-treatment results.
[Figure 11]
Figure 11. Meta-analysis of GMI programmes versus usual care for pain. Outcome 0-100 VAS. Results at follow up (3 or 6 months).
[Figure 12]
Figure 12. Meta-analysis of GMI programmes versus usual care for function. Outcome 0-11 patient specific functional scale. Immediate post-treatment results.
[Figure 13]
Figure 13. Meta-analysis of GMI programmes versus usual care for function. Outcome 0-11 patient-specific functional scale. Results at follow up (3 or 6 months).