Treatment priority in limb loss with phantom syndrome
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A study of people living with limb loss and post-amputation syndrome to identify their priority for treatment.
IRAS ID
199713
Contact name
Jai Kulkarni
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University Hospitals South Manchester
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 0 months, 1 days
Research summary
Following limb amputation the majority of people develop symptoms of a phantom in their missing limb. These symptoms vary between the feeling that the limb is present to having sensations such as itch, pins and needles and pain in the phantom. Many people have several symptoms at the same time.
Phantom sensations and phantom pain are known to be fluctuant and can vary significantly within a day and between days. Phantom pain and pain in the residual limb have proven to be difficult to manage and there is no established first line treatment for them. There have been many studies (mainly small scale and of low rigour) exploring the management of pain in people with pain following amputation and phantom pain. Most studies have focused on the management of pain intensity however it may be that there are other treatment targets that would be more sensitive to the needs of people following limb loss. As phantom sensation and phantom limb pain are fluctuant/episodic it may be that the target for treatment should be reducing the number of attacks per day or reducing the length of each attack rather than controlling the pain intensity. No previous study has explored this area before.
We intend to include a mixed sample of people with limb loss to enable us to explore differences between upper and lower limb amputation and major and minor amputation.
The study will include a clinician completed questionnaire during a scheduled clinic appointment. This will identify the type of amputation and specific clinical details about their post-amputation pain. All participants will be asked about what they believe to be the elements of the post-amputation pain experience that should be treated most with most importance. This will enable us to engineer their treatment in a more patient centred way.REC name
South Central - Oxford B Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
16/SC/0252
Date of REC Opinion
6 May 2016
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion