British Journal of Pain, volume 7, issue 2, pages 95-100

Aluminium foil for the prevention of post-amputation pain: a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial

Publication typeJournal Article
Publication date2013-04-22
Q2
Q4
SJR0.523
CiteScore3.2
Impact factor1.3
ISSN20494637, 20494645
Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
Abstract
Introduction:

Phantom limb pain (PLP) is a painful sensation perceived in the missing limb after amputation. The underlying pathophysiology remains unclear. Until recently, only opioid analgesics have been proven to be effective in prospective studies. Anecdotally, patients with PLP employ self-help measures, sometimes including ‘wrapping up’ or rubbing their stump with aluminium foil for relief. Our hypothesis is that wrapping an amputation stump with aluminium foil perioperatively will prevent PLP in the postoperative period.

Methods:

From September 2007 to September 2009, 32 consecutive patients were included in a crossover, double-blinded, randomised clinical trial. Perioperative fitting of an aluminium stump bandage was compared with a placebo paper foil. Scores were noted daily in a variable diary. The observation period was 2 weeks: in the first week participants were double blinded, and in the second week there was a change of bandage from aluminium to placebo or vice versa. A visual analogue scale (VAS) score was used as primary research variable. Secondary variables were use of analgesics, VAS measures of wound pain and the incidence of wound infections. Statistical analysis was done by means of Student’s t-test for non-paired observations.

Results:

Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. A period effect ( p= 0.84) and treatment–period interaction ( p = 0.79) were not present. There was no significant difference (mean difference 0.42) between both treatments in PLP VAS scores (95% CI −2.56 to −1.81, p = 0.71). VAS measure of wound pain showed no significant difference between both groups (mean difference 0.34, 95% CI −2.32 to −1.66, p = 0.72). Also, the other secondary endpoints did not differ.

Conclusion:

Patients receiving an aluminium foil stump wrapping do not experience less phantom pain than with a placebo.

Found 

Are you a researcher?

Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Metrics
Share
Cite this
GOST |
Cite this
GOST Copy
Minnee R. C. et al. Aluminium foil for the prevention of post-amputation pain: a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial // British Journal of Pain. 2013. Vol. 7. No. 2. pp. 95-100.
GOST all authors (up to 50) Copy
Minnee R. C., Bosma J., Lam K. Y., Wisselink W., Vahl A. C. Aluminium foil for the prevention of post-amputation pain: a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial // British Journal of Pain. 2013. Vol. 7. No. 2. pp. 95-100.
RIS |
Cite this
RIS Copy
TY - JOUR
DO - 10.1177/2049463713485727
UR - https://doi.org/10.1177/2049463713485727
TI - Aluminium foil for the prevention of post-amputation pain: a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial
T2 - British Journal of Pain
AU - Minnee, Robert C.
AU - Bosma, Jan
AU - Lam, Kayan Y
AU - Wisselink, Willem
AU - Vahl, Anco C.
PY - 2013
DA - 2013/04/22
PB - SAGE
SP - 95-100
IS - 2
VL - 7
SN - 2049-4637
SN - 2049-4645
ER -
BibTex |
Cite this
BibTex (up to 50 authors) Copy
@article{2013_Minnee,
author = {Robert C. Minnee and Jan Bosma and Kayan Y Lam and Willem Wisselink and Anco C. Vahl},
title = {Aluminium foil for the prevention of post-amputation pain: a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial},
journal = {British Journal of Pain},
year = {2013},
volume = {7},
publisher = {SAGE},
month = {apr},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1177/2049463713485727},
number = {2},
pages = {95--100},
doi = {10.1177/2049463713485727}
}
MLA
Cite this
MLA Copy
Minnee, Robert C., et al. “Aluminium foil for the prevention of post-amputation pain: a randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover trial.” British Journal of Pain, vol. 7, no. 2, Apr. 2013, pp. 95-100. https://doi.org/10.1177/2049463713485727.
Found error?