Showing posts with label IASP. Show all posts
Showing posts with label IASP. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 8, 2014

Wonderful Competency

This is a pleased-as-punch pass-along of a report published yesterday in Consultant for Pediatricians, as part of their "photoclinic" --


    [Citation: CFP. 2014;13(7):330-331]

There's not one thing remarkable about it.

Except it shows evidence of prompt response to a new case of CRPS, an awareness of IASP "Budapest criteria," and a complete absence of NeuroStupidity.

Way to go, Mfon Ekong, MD; Anissa Meher-Homji, BS; and Lynnette Mazur, MD, MPH of the University of Texas Medical School at Houston!


Complex Regional Pain Syndrome

A 10-year-old girl presented with a 3-month history of right knee pain and difficulty walking after her pet German shepherd bumped her leg. She also complained of a 2-week history of hair growth below her right knee.

On physical examination, she had edema, a 12 × 10-cm patch of hair, and decreased range of motion of the right knee. Results of complete blood count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, complete metabolic profile, creatine kinase tests, and myoglobin tests were normal. Findings on magnetic resonance imaging were unremarkable.



The girl received a diagnosis of complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) and was hospitalized for inpatient physical therapy. An indwelling catheter was placed for a femoral nerve block. Ropivacaine was continued for 8 days, after which the girl was transferred to a local rehabilitation facility to continue physical therapy, along with continuous passive motion (CPM) of the knee. She was started on gabapentin, fluoxetine, vitamin D, and as-needed diazepam, and was discharged after 1 month to continue her treatment at home.

CRPS, formerly called reflex sympathetic dystrophy, is a painful syndrome accompanied by physical changes in the affected extremity. Dysfunction of local sympathetic and autonomic nerves may be responsible.1-3

Our patient reported 3 of 4 symptoms (allodynia to clothing, edema, and decreased range of motion) and 2 of 3 signs (hyperalgesia to pinprick and allodynia to light touch) meeting the clinical diagnostic criteria for CRPS set forth by the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) (Table).4


[read the rest of this wonderful competency HERE]





Thursday, October 13, 2011

Going up, again.

Repost from 7/22/2010 as recent events have resurrected The Elevator Dream. Not the act of dreaming, of course, because that would imply sleep. No, what has brought the demons back, today, is my need of money. How crass, you may be thinking. No luck with that Gratitude Journal, huh? There's nothing crass about needing money and being too ill to work, too disabled to labor, too unreliable to front a classroom. I know the party line. I know I am blessed to have private long term disability insurance. In the world of blessings and gratitude, hell, I am touched by grace just to be alive. Yet there are days, even whole years, where my inability to effect financial change drags down my health, my soul, my family's health, my family's soul. Somewhere along the line, I bought into the crap that disabled sick people are throw-aways, that I am a throw-away. I may live, but I may NOT live well.  I may live, but to others' standards.  People are deciding my relative worth every day, in ways I am only now beginning to understand.

Left to certain political audiences, I don't merit life, even.


And as I am less and less inclined to worship at the correctness altar -- even with all its delectable old men's wrinkled butt lined up at a kissable level, at the worship ready -- my "options" will soon be limited to a point that will, definitively, take my breath away.

Grader Boob was informed today that he'll be unemployed next semester; 
Fred needs cash to tend to very important Fred-things; 
 Bianca needs a new pair of shoes; Miss Marmy Fluffy Butt prefers the more expensive litter; 
and Buddy the Kitten has decided to be a Maine Coon and will not stop growing for at least three years. 
These are people [well, mostly people] to whom I want to turn
 in my *fullness*, not this perpetual emptiness of almost-can.  


As I sought to relax, it was, unfortunately, the screeching Dr. Sween who provided the audio portion of
 my mental exercise, and I found myself wanting to screech back.  
If putting up another repost keeps me from breaking into full-screech mode tonight?  Small price to pay to get to tomorrow, sane.
 I've got to get out of this damned elevator. 
  


Chuckle.

Remember my recent post on the IASP and the movement toward an improved instrument of diagnostic criteria for CRPS? No?  Well, you can read it here.

These optimistic good folk are at it again, as they now take on "wait times." May their optimism collide with reality in a non-distant future!  Blessed are these forces, tasked with improving our lot!

Give their latest a quick read: The International Association for the Study of Pain Task Force on Wait-Times.

Weary giggle.

Weary sniff.

Yes, as usual, I confront the helping hands of scientific task forces and medical recommendation-makers with my own effed-up brand of real and actual appreciation, spiced with frustration and a dash of jealous resentment.

I appreciate and do my best to broadcast all progress, doing due diligence, working to stay openminded when the work challenges my beliefs, trying to stay humble and happy when the researchers and medicos arrive painstakingly at what seems so very obvious.

In my world, the obvious does not have to undergo the rigors of proof.

I cannot deny the surge of anger I feel, knowing how the system that now teeters and totters its way toward progress, totally let me down back when I needed clear diagnostic criteria and some guideline hammering home the need for quick diagnosis and faster treatment. At least these bitter moments are fewer now, more quickly suppressed, and almost completely consigned to my sleeping hours.

So...you want to know the recommendation from the IASP regarding level of alarm and desirous wait time in new CRPS cases?

Are you sure?

They classify a new case of CRPS as "Most Urgent."
They recommend a wait time of no longer than "one week."

Mwa ha ha!

Having had a "classic presentation," which politely presented itself in a hospital setting, even, you'd think I would have had a great shot at early, correct diagnosis, or, at least, a correct early referral to an appropriate specialty -- neurology or pain management.

Well, of course, I did.  And I did not, as well.

Unfortunately, the hospital (with its specificity of place, persons, and situations) was the direct cause of my CRPS, and so: Lo! Hark! Why am I still surprised to realize that "it" consciously, and with premeditation, condemned me to a life of pain and disability?  So what if they successfully deferred my diagnosis for over 19 months?

I managed to put the details of my CRPS story in a blog post recently.  It may or may not clarify things were you to read that first!

I still dream dreams of being in the elevator of one of the Doctors' Buildings attached to the hospital, on my way to... I don't know where. I am studying the buttons, trying to remember what floor I want. Slowly, I become aware of someone else in the elevator, someone whose white coat is visible out of the corner of my eye.

It is, most often, Dr. Sween. That's kind of not fair, as all he did was obstruct my treatment and -- aside from that little bit of malpractice -- abuse me, emotionally. He told me his tale of woe -- how his department had to suffer the indignity of a state-level investigation because I had the unmitigated gall to report a Sentinel Event that went unreported by a half-dozen doctors, dozens of nurses, and the entire SJHA hospital administration. He scoffed at me when I began to cry over the fear I had of the future -- no possibility of ever teaching again, ever earning my way, supporting my family. It had not dawned on me, then, that I would suffer physically forever and anon. It had not dawned on me precisely because my experience precluded the possibility for that much pain to endure. Who'd a thunk it, outside of a medical professional or two?

Courtesy of The Joint Commission:

A sentinel event is an unexpected occurrence involving death or serious physical or psychological injury, or the risk thereof.  Serious injury specifically includes loss of limb or function.  The phrase, "or the risk thereof" includes any process variation for which a recurrence would carry a significant chance of a serious adverse outcome.  Such events are called "sentinel" because they signal the need for immediate investigation and response.
Sween yelled that there was no way I had suffered an adrenal crisis due to a failure to premedicate (also intra- and post- medicate, but I don't want to seem picky).  It just wasn't possible and anyone who thought so did not know what they were talking about.  And, certainly, the person ill-mannered enough to actually go into complete adrenal failure was a person to be dismissed and ignored.  As soon as the nitwit navigates his way out of cardiac and kidney failure, squeezes by the dangers of that hospital-acquired infection, 'n his heart rate sees the underside of 160, that is...

Of course, my mind wandered to my endocrinologist, but I am sure that's not whom he meant!  Not the doctor who came in one night -- a few weeks after the initial failure to medicate -- and found me "altered" enough, and complaining of those vague, ridiculous symptoms (weakness, diarrhea, lower back pain, craving salt) to warrant ordering an immediate cortisol level... and found a level of .05 mcg/dL. That's POINT ZERO FIVE.  That's right, he documented another failure to medicate -- the one that you swear has no discernible impact on adrenal function -- and then he documented the result.  We keep that lab result in archival preservative materials, and the Cistercians-Next-Door are guarding it with the same dedication they bring to the protection of Jesus' Foreskin, their greatest relic.

So *bleep* you, and your department, Dr. Sween!  Your discomfort at being investigated came and went;  Your means of livelihood are intact;  Nothing too bad happened to you. You are the SJHA Poster Boy!

*Bleep* you.  And *bleep* your Mama, too.  How you loved to tell me how you loved teachers.  "I come from a family of teachers.  I know how hard you work!"  No problem loading me up on ungodly amounts of Oxycontin -- but see that I was diagnosed and treated in a timely fashion for a severe and disabling neurological disorder?  Hell, no!

Next, I catch a glimpse of a white coat so starched that it looks to be of marble, a coat more brilliantly white than... well, white. It always turns out to be Dr. Kelman, the doctor most likely to form opinions according to the direction of the prevailing breeze upon his spittle-drenched index finger. Truly a bad doctor. I really mean that. Dr. Sween? He is capable of being a superb doctor. It's basically his choice. Dr. Kelman? Poor thing, he can't help himself.  Plus, I believe he may be a sociopath. I'm not entirely sure about that yet.

Almost, but not quite.

As the neurologist, it should have been evident what he was dealing with -- an emergent case of CRPS. ("Classic." "Textbook." That is how the neurologist who did make the diagnosis described my case, 19 months later. There was nothing difficult or bizarre in my presentation.)  Doctor Kelman, though, is not in tune, not up with, such medical niceties... but man-o-man, is he ever atune to the niceties of MedMal law and knows to whom he owes allegiance. In case you are wondering -- he was the mouthpiece for the hospital. The sequalae I suffered after a totally preventable Addisonian crisis and a fall in ICU that fractured several bones, concussed my one head, and introduced weeks of internal g.i. bleeding, etc.? They were laughable (I think that because he laughed...) and due to "emotion." My left hand was in the shape of a claw, spasming, too painful to touch... My right leg was in deplorable condition, rotating outward, hugely swollen, reacting to the movement of air with ugly recrimination -- forget how it felt when actually poked or gripped for pulses...

He did not even speak *to* me. Dr. Kelman stood at the foot of my bed -- indeed, he once bumped the bottom of my right foot and laughed at my reaction (in addition to being emergent CRPS, the ankle was fractured) -- he stood at the foot of my bed and loudly proclaimed to the orthopedic surgeon covering for my own wayward specialist, that my problems were emotional and that clearly I had had too much pain medication.

I cannot even work up a respectable "mwa... haaaaaaaaaaa... haaaaaaaaaaaaaa - ah - ah" at the memory of Dr. Kelman.

When it became clear to him that I was not an idiot (which took more time than I like to admit), he tried a new claim. Actually, I guess he never did stop thinking that I was an idiot because his claim was this: "What NEW case of CRPS? Why, you've always had CRPS. I should know, I diagnosed it years ago!"

No, sorry, despite years of reflection, review of records, inquiries made and answered --  I cannot explain what he was hoping to accomplish with that announcement!  Many a brow has furrowed in its wake.  I do, however, have a letter saved -- that I do not remember writing, but which I do like, and like very much. In it, I defend the honor of the Physical Therapist doing home visits with me, a talented young woman who hit upon CRPS almost immediately. When I shared her diagnosis with Dr. Kelman, he started yipping at me like an overexcited little lap dog, saying, among other things: "How dare you question my diagnosis, especially because of some stupid PT who doesn't know anything about anything..." That was my last visit to dear, dear Dr. Kelman. He never took me up on my offer to put his claims of "preexisting CRPS" in writing.  It would have been quite the accomplishment to have diagnosed me with CRPS/RSD years before the onset of any symptoms -- a real diagnostic tour de force.

Oddly enough, the person least often in the elevator of my dreams is Dr. Carson, the orthopod who really should be first in line for any oneiric revenge fantasies. The thought of him still terrifies me enough that I cannot even let the elevator doors close before I panic.  Sometimes my wheelchair is caught in the opening-closing-opening-closing doors, and I am trapped.

I was still in the ICU the day he stood by my bed and told me: "I do not have to fix your leg... really it is an elective surgery, you know, I don't have to do a thing about it." {Large, ingratiating, insouciant smile}

I asked him what would happen to my broken, oddly-angled foot and ankle without surgery;  He laughed. He said, "It would stay like it is now, a perfectly acceptable outcome." {Large, ingratiating, insouciant smile}  That would mean hanging weirdly on the end of my swollen, red leg, unusable?

At the evident horror on my face, and in sagacious fear of a taperecorder: "I will fix it, but I want you to know I don't have to..." More laughter.

Shiver. More shivers.

Oh, I bet you want to know what goes on in my elevator! Well, each man says something like, "Ahem. Hello, Ms. Retired Educator. How have you been doing?" Their voices are not normal. They are castrati: mezzo-soprano, contralto. Kelman, as much a true soprano as Michael Maniaci.

I cannot answer their polite queries, of course.

I have no voice.

The doors close, we go up precisely two floors, and the doors open. I rush my wheelchair through the opening, zig-zagging in my nervousness. This is not my floor but I have to get out of there...

Yes, well.

Not even my dreams are subtle.

As I said, the news in the world of pain management today comes in the form of these recommendations about "wait time" from the IASP:

Most urgent (1 week): acute painful severe condition with risk of deterioration or chronicity (new CRPS) or pain related to cancer or terminal or end stage illness (acute herpes zoster also requires urgent treatment but ideally should be treated at the primary care level rather than requiring a pain specialist service).


• Urgent or semi-urgent (1 month): severe undiagnosed or progressive pain and risk of increasing functional impairment generally 6 months duration or less (back pain not resolving, neuropathic pain, post surgical or post traumatic pain)


•Routine or regular (4 months): persistent long-term pain without significant progression

Monday, August 9, 2010

Free Downloads and More On CRPS Diagnostic Criteria (Woo Hoo!)

In the course of writing one blog post, here I am authoring another.

I just ran across a good article in the newly launched Wiley Online Library -- then discovered the offer of free downloads of most read and most cited articles from the journal Pain Medicine (The Official Journal of the American Academy of Pain Medicine and of the Faculty of Pain Medicine of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists and of the International Spine Intervention Society).

Okay, it amounts to just a handful of articles, but some of them are quite good, especially those of the sort I often malign (but always read!) -- the dread review article.

So let us rejoice.
Amen, and amen!

From Volume 8, Number 4, 2007 -- more on diagnostic criteria in CRPS, just in case you haven't realized the importance of this issue by the fact that I have been droning on and on about it at every opportunity.  Anyway, this is a great foundational article about the discussion and helps to put the IASP criteria and the Budapest group's proposals in context.


Proposed New Diagnostic Criteria for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome

R. Norman Harden, MD, Stephen Bruehl, PhD, Michael Stanton-Hicks, MB, BS, DMSc, FRCA, ABPM, and Peter R. Wilson, MB, BS

Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois;  Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee; Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio; Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA


ABSTRACT:  This topical update reports recent progress in the international effort to develop a more accurate and valid diagnostic criteria for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). The diagnostic entity of CRPS (published in the International Association for the Study of Pain’s Taxonomy monograph in 1994; International Association for the Study of Pain [IASP]) was intended to be descriptive, general, and not imply etiopathology, and had the potential to lead to improved clinical communication and greater generalizability across research samples. Unfortunately, realization of this potential has been limited by the fact that these criteria were based solely on consensus and utilization of the criteria in the literature has been sporadic at best. As a consequence, the full potential benefits of the IASP criteria have not been realized. Consensus-derived criteria that are not subsequently validated may lead to over- or underdiagnosis, and will reduce the ability to provide timely and optimal treatment. Results of validation studies to date suggest that the IASP/CRPS diagnostic criteria are adequately sensitive; however, both internal and external validation research suggests that utilization of these criteria causes problems of overdiagnosis due to poor specificity. This update summarizes the latest international consensus group’s action in Budapest, Hungary to approve and codify empirically validated, statistically derived revisions of the IASP criteria for CRPS.


Formerly Wiley Interscience, the Wiley Online Library just launched  -- as in *yesterday* -- and it's got some great new features plus a few things in The Realm of The Free (my favorite realm!):

Free access and access information.

Free abstracts and chapter summaries:  All journal abstracts and chapter summaries in books and reference works are free to all users of Wiley Online Library.


Free sample issues:
Each journal has a free sample issue that you can find from the left menu of any journal page.


Free supporting information:
Some articles include extra supporting information and this is available free to all users of the website. You can find supporting information in an extra tab from the abstract or article page.


Access icons:
Shows users in libraries what is free, what you or your institution has subscribed to and you can access.


Access information:
Clearly see why you might not be able to access an article, book, chapter or whole product and find out your options. [Booo!]

Thursday, August 5, 2010

Three Months Later: José Ochoa, *Still* A Big, Fat Turd

Do you remember the couple of posts wherein I called José Ochoa a turd?  No?  Well, you can read up on this poor excuse for a hackjob doctor here and here

Or you can keep reading this post, as I am about to call José Ochoa a turd one more time.  He's co-authored an eight-page article painting people diagnosed with CRPS as malingerers, as suffering from conversion disorder, or -- now isn't this kind of him to allow? -- as harboring "unrecognized pathology (lesions) of the nervous system."

He has built a lucrative career testifying about his [now very lonely] contention that CRPS does not exist. His forensic testimony has less and less influence as hard science advances, but his path remains littered with broken lives -- lives financially ruined, physically and emotionally devastated by his self-enrichment campaign.

Am I questioning the data he reports?  Not at all.

Do I propose canonization of people with CRPS, an affliction that only strikes the angelic, a syndrome often caused by work-related injuries, associated with legal action, and therefore never feigned by lazy dipshits? Nope!

I do protest the authors' simultaneous display of contempt for "the label" CRPS and their ready glee to paint all those diagnosed with CRPS with the same brush as those identified as malingerers.  In lieu of identifying the defects in the diagnosis process, they have assumed a character defect in the vast majority of real sufferers. 

It's tiresome, it's disgusting, and Ochoa needs to find a new way to invent scientific support for his true calling:  his own enrichment.

I am almost completely out of line in writing this blog post, but I really don't care.  I have not read the article I am maligning, would not spend the money to buy it or to subscribe to the journal, and have no basis for attacking the study results.

I am just mad that Ochoa has been published again, that he has found another means of advancing his loathesome small-mindedness and greed.

Don't get me wrong, I know that many doctors and most researchers are fully cognizant of his malicious intent. It's just that his energies would be better used -- and actually appreciated! -- were he to channel them toward, say, working with the IASP and their efforts to produce workable, effective diagnostic criteria for CRPS.  The data he is producing does nothing but make that endeavor even more worthwhile.  The better the diagnostic criteria, the fewer malingerers abusing the justice and health systems.

I am the last person to contest legitimate dissent, no matter the subject matter. But neither am I going to assert the rights of an academic who might, for example, publish work after work about the Holocaust as a fiction, no matter how well-documented. (I am not trying to aggrandize CRPS as a topic, that is just the first instance that came to mind. So let me add that neither would I debate The Texas School Board on textbook choice or history and science curricula!)

In the years 1997-2009, Dr. Ochoa has earned, according to his own testimony, between $300,000 and $400,000 a year -- over a 12-year period, he has made between 3.6 and 4.8 million dollars by denying the existence of CRPS. Given that there is no research that legitimizes his claim, it makes sense that he needs to publish something, periodically, that he can use to maintain his claim to be an expert. There simply is NO currently valid research to which he can point, beyond what he manages to publish.

God help the poor patient with CRPS whose unsuspecting family doctor refers him to The Oregon Nerve Center, to Dr. Ochoa. Hoping for treatment, these patients will instead be subjected to his pre-suppositions about their physical symptoms and psychological makeup.

The worst crime of all?  The delay in treatment -- which can obviate the possibility of a fairly easy cure -- that may result from Dr. Ochoa and his campaign against the existence of CRPS.

ABSTRACT
Neuropathic Pain Syndrome Displayed by Malingerers
José L. Ochoa, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc. and Renato J. Verdugo, M.D., M.Sc.
J Neuropsychiatry Clin Neurosci.2010; 22: 278-286

Received October 27, 2009; accepted April 1, 2010. The authors are affiliated with The Oregon Nerve Center at Legacy Health Systems and the Departments of Neurology and Neurosurgery at Oregon Health and Science University in Portland, Oregon; Dr. Verdugo is also affiliated with the Department of Neurology, Faculty of Medicine, Universidad de Chile, in Santiago, Chile. Address correspondence to José L. Ochoa, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc., The Oregon Nerve Center, Good Samaritan Medical Center, 1040 NW 22nd Ave., Suite 600, Portland, OR 97210; jochoa@nervesense.net (e-mail).

Among 237 patients communicating chronic pain, associated with sensory-motor and "autonomic" displays, qualifying taxonomically for neuropathic pain, there were 16 shown through surveillance to be malingerers. When analyzed through neurological methods, their profile was characteristically atypical. There were no objective equivalents of peripheral or central processes impairing nerve impulse transmission. In absence of medical explanation, all 16 had been adjudicated, by default, the label complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). The authors emphasize that CRPS patients may not only harbor unrecognized pathology ("lesion") of the nervous system (CRPS II), hypothetical central neuronal "dysfunction" (CRPS I), or conversion disorder, but may display a recognizable simulated illness without neuropsychiatric pathology.
[You may read more HERE]








NOTE: The law firm had to take down this illustrious video because Ochoa sued them, saying it cost him revenue.  What a turd.  There's an excellent unbiased summation of the non-board certified Doctor Ochoa by the Third Circuit Louisiana State of Appeals Court HERE. As for what you would have seen in the video -- the patient being examined by The Turd asks him to be aware of the severe allodynia she has in her hand.  He proceeds to blow on it and also to pinch it -- saying, in what can only be the cutest SCOTUS reference of all time, that he was just removing the "pubic hair" that was somehow on her hand.  I say again:  turd, turd, turd.

Posted to YouTube by LawlorWinston | September 21, 2009, with this comment:


Here we see Dr. Jose L. Ochoa, a defense-retained expert, in a portion of his examination of a woman whom six other physicians, including another defense-retained expert have diagnosed with RSD/CRPS-1. The Plaintiff, who suffers from crippling neurological pain, has requested Dr. Ochoa not blow air on her affected extremities.

RSD is an abbreviation for "Relex Sympathetic Dystrophy", also referred to as "Complex Regional Pain Syndrome" (CRPS).

Dr. Ochoa has become one of the foremost experts used by Defendants in lawsuits involving RSD/CRPS by denying that this condition is an actual "diagnosis". His opinions have been stricken or otherwise disallowed as unscientific in at least three States.
[Trust me, I'd much rather be watching a video over at PTZ.  I keep waiting for Ochoa to be featured over there, but I guess Emilbus only has room for so many explosive pilonidal cysts.]

Thursday, July 8, 2010

CRPS: IASP Diagnostic Criteria Taken to Task


The latest news from my MedWorm CRPS-related feeds addresses the diagnostic criteria established by the International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP). The longheld general opinion is that these criteria have "high sensitivity," but "poor specificity," with the resultant complaint of overdiagnosis of CRPS.

It's a good dialogue to have at this time, and one that needs to be renewed periodically, as the hard science attempts to catch up with the clinical expressions of the disease. The summary conclusion of this round of talks is a clear preference for the Budapest CRPS Criteria over the IASP recommendations most widely in force. For an excellent summary (and yes, it will seem repetitive to some of you) see Dr. Bruehl's power point presentation here, on CRPS taxonomy. The IASP criteria are sometimes shorthanded as "the Bruehl criteria," remember!

All three of the following studies were published in the online version of PAIN: The journal of the IASP.*


Development of comprehensive diagnostic criteria for complex regional pain syndrome in the Japanese population

Masahiko Sumitani, Masahiko Shibat, Gaku Sakaue, Takashi Mashimo, Japanese CRPS Research Group

Received 31 July 2009; received in revised form 21 January 2010; accepted 23 March 2010. published online 07 May 2010

Abstract
Complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) is a syndrome that describes a broad spectrum of sensory, motor and autonomic-like features with unproven etiology. The International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP) diagnostic criteria of CRPS shows high sensitivity but poor specificity. Using statistical-pattern-recognition methods, American researchers have suggested a new set of criteria offering acceptable sensitivity and high specificity. However, non-American CRPS patients present distinct subsets of CRPS-related signs/symptoms from those of American patients. Here, we followed a series of American studies to develop a set of CRPS diagnostic criteria that would be most suitable for the Japanese population. A standardized sign/symptom checklist was used in patient evaluations to obtain data on CRPS-related signs/symptoms in 195 participants meeting the IASP criteria. Using factor analysis, we grouped CRPS-related signs/symptoms into five distinct subgroups (trophic change, motor dysfunction, abnormal pain processing, asymmetric sudomotor activity and asymmetric edema). Discriminant function analysis of these subgroups, regarding their ability to discriminate between CRPS and non-CRPS etiology, indicated that modifying the IASP criteria could increase clinical diagnostic accuracy in the Japanese population. Our diagnostic criteria are not exactly the same as the American criteria, indicating a need for more regionally based CRPS diagnostic criteria. Different sets of CRPS diagnostic criteria could lead to dissimilar patients being diagnosed as CRPS, however, presenting problems for translation of therapeutic effects found in various studies. Therefore, we further recognize a need for a global set of common CRPS diagnostic criteria.


I have to say that the words "unproven etiology" fairly jump off the page, even though I understand that determining the larger cause-and-effect relationships -- generally noxious events and nerve injuries -- is not equivalent to establishing useful, science-supported proven etiologies, being more in the nature of events. (Leave my sentence alone!) What is especially important is to reiterate that hanging everything from the nail of sympathetically-maintained pain [SMP], and diagnosis by sympathetic block, is definitively outmoded, and usually just plain wrong.

The necessity for regionally-based (or nation-based) diagnostic criteria makes enormous sense, particularly given the rigarmarole above of unproven etiologies. It is gratifying, though, that the five (or the Budapest 4!) basic subgroupings for CRPS symptoms hold "true." The practicing medical world dearly loves a checklist.


Modifying diagnostic criteria for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome by Stephen Bruehl, Ph.D. appears in the same issue (Volume 150, Issue 2, August 2010). Dr. Bruehl, of Vanderbilt, is a clinical psychologist, specializing in "Endogenous Pain Regulatory Systems and the Psychobiology of Emotions":

The general focus of Dr. Bruehl’s work is on understanding the functioning of endogenous pain regulatory systems in healthy individuals, and possible dysfunction in these systems associated with chronic pain. Endogenous pain regulatory systems are complex, involving descending pain inhibitory pathways mediated in part by both endogenous opioid and alpha-2 adrenergic mechanisms. Moreover, there appear to be adaptive functional interactions between the cardiovascular and pain regulatory systems that serve to maintain homeostasis in the presence of painful stimuli. Dr. Bruehl’s work focuses on the interface between these areas, and how chronically painful conditions alter the normal functioning of these interacting systems.


Dr. Bruehl figures in the [Budapest] group publishing the third article in this PAIN "series" on CRPS, as well:

Validation of proposed diagnostic criteria (the “Budapest Criteria”) for Complex Regional Pain Syndrome

R. Norman Harden, Stephen Bruehl, Roberto S.G.M. Perez, Frank Birklein, Johan Marinus, Christian Maihofner, Timothy Lubenow, Asokumar Buvanendran, Sean Mackey, Joseph Graciosa, Mila Mogilevski, Christopher Ramsden, Melissa Chont, Jean-Jacques Vatin

Received 18 November 2009; Received in revised form 19 March 2010; Accepted 20 April 2010. Published online 21 May 2010.

Abstract
Current IASP diagnostic criteria for CRPS have low specificity, potentially leading to overdiagnosis. This validation study compared current IASP diagnostic criteria for CRPS to proposed new diagnostic criteria (the “Budapest Criteria”) regarding diagnostic accuracy. Structured evaluations of CRPS-related signs and symptoms were conducted in 113 CRPS-I and 47 non-CRPS neuropathic pain patients. Discriminating between diagnostic groups based on presence of signs or symptoms meeting IASP criteria showed high diagnostic sensitivity (1.00), but poor specificity (0.41), replicating prior work. In comparison, the Budapest clinical criteria retained the exceptional sensitivity of the IASP criteria (0.99), but greatly improved upon the specificity (0.68). As designed, the Budapest research criteria resulted in the highest specificity (0.79), again replicating prior work. Analyses indicated that inclusion of four distinct CRPS components in the Budapest Criteria contributed to enhanced specificity. Overall, results corroborate the validity of the Budapest Criteria and suggest they improve upon existing IASP diagnostic criteria for CRPS.




* PAIN® is the official journal of the International Association for the Study of Pain® (IASP).