3.8 Article

Chronic musculoskeletal pain, phantom sensation, phantom and stump pain in veterans with unilateral below-knee amputation

Journal

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PAIN
Volume 19, Issue 4, Pages 779-787

Publisher

WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH
DOI: 10.1515/sjpain-2019-0045

Keywords

veterans; musculoskeletal pain; prosthesis wear

Funding

  1. JMERC (Janbazan Medical Engineer Research Center)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and aims: Many individuals with lower limb loss report concerns about other musculoskeletal symptoms resulting from amputation. The objective of this study was to assess chronic musculoskeletal pain in Iranian veterans with unilateral below-knee amputation. Methods: The participants agreed to take part in a health needs assessment and were interviewed face-to-face by trained interviewers. The assessment consisted of demographic information, wearing a prosthesis, pain locations in extremities, stump complications, severity of pains related to amputation and low back pain. Results: Of 247 unilateral below knee amputees, 97.9% wore a prosthetic limb and times walking or standing with the prosthesis were 12.47 +/- 3.84 and 4.22 +/- 3.53 h a day, respectively. Low soft tissue coverage of the stump (15.4%) and symptomatic osteoarthritis in the contralateral lower extremity (40.1%) were the most common complications. The prevalence of stump pain, phantom sensations, phantom pain, low back pain, and knee pain was 84.2%, 77.3%, 73.7%, 78.1%, and 54.7% respectively. The odds ratio of stump pain in amputees with phantom pain was 2.22 times higher than those who did not experience phantom pain [OR = 2.22 (CI: 1.19-14.17); p= 0.012] and the odds ratio of low back pain was higher in amputees with stump pain [OR =3.06 (CI: 1.50-6.21); p= 0.002]. Conclusions: This research enhances our understanding of comorbid musculoskeletal problems in below-knee amputees which can help health providers to identify rehabilitation needs and emphasizes the importance of regular assessments.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available