Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Weiterbildung Schmerzmedizin pp 67–73Cite as

Phantomschmerz

Psychologische Behandlungsstrategien

  • Chapter

  • 2749 Accesses

Zusammenfassung

Wie andere chronische Schmerzsyndrome ist auch der Phantomschmerz durch Lern- und Gedächtnisprozesse gekennzeichnet, die den Schmerz aufrechterhalten und maladaptive plastische Veränderungen des Gehirns verstärken. Deshalb sind auch hier psychologische Interventionen, die maladaptive Gedächtnisspuren verändern, sinnvoll. Neben dem Schmerzbewältigungstraining und Biofeedbackverfahren als traditionelle Ansätze finden neuere Entwicklungen wie sensorisches Diskriminationstraining, Spiegeltherapie, Vorstellungstraining, Prothesentraining oder Training in der virtuellen Realität Anwendung. Diese Verfahren verändern nicht nur den Phantomschmerz, sondern auch die damit einhergehenden plastischen Veränderungen des Gehirns.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   29.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   17.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature

  1. Jensen TS, Krebs B, Nielsen J et al (1985) Immediateand long-term phantom limb pain in amputees: in- cidence, dinical characteristics and relationship to pre-amputation limb pain. Pain 21:267–278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sherman RA, Sherman CJ (1983) Pre- valence and characteristics of chronic phantom limb pain among American veterans. Results of a trial sur- vey. Am J Phys Med 62:227–238

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Nikolajsen L, Jensen TS (2006) Phantom limb. In: McMahon S, Koltzen- burg M Wall and Melzack's textbook of pain. Churchill-Living- stone, London, S 961–971

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sherman RA (1997) Phantom pain. Plenum Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Vase L, Nikolajsen L, Christensen B et al (2011) Cognitive-emotional sensitization contributes to wind- up-like pain in phantom limb pain patients. Pain 152:157–162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. HanleyMA, Jensen MREhde DM etal (2004) Psychosocial predictors of long-term adjustment to lower- limb amputation and phantom limb pain. Disabil Rehabil 26:882–893

    Google Scholar 

  7. Jensen MP, Ehde DM, Hoffman AJ et al (2002) Cognitions, coping and social environment predict adjustment to phantom limb pain. Pain 95:133–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wei F, Zhuo M (2001) Potentiation ofsensory responses in the anterior cingulate cortex following digit amputation in the anaesthetised rat. J Physiol 532:823–833

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Willoch F, Rosen G, Tolle TR et al (2000) Phantom limb pain in the human brain: unraveling neural circui- tries of phantom limb sensations using positron emission tomogra- phy. Ann Neural 48:842–849

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Elbert TR, Flor H, Birbaumer N et al (1994) Extensive reorganization of the somatosensory cortex in adult humans after nervous system injury. Neuroreport 5:2593–2597

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Flor H, Elbert T, Knecht S et al (1995) Phantom-Iimb pain as a perceptu- al correlate of cortical reorganization following arm amputation. Nature 375:482–484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Price DD, Verne GN, SchwartzJM (2006) Plasticity in brain processing and modulation of pain. Prag Brain Res 157:333–352

    Google Scholar 

  13. Yang TT, Gallen CC, Ramachandran VS et al (1994) Noninvasive detecti- on of cerebral plasticity in adult human somatosensory cortex. Neuroreport 5:701–704

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Cohen LG, Bandinelli S, FindleyTW et al (1991) Motor reorganization after upper limb amputation in man. Brain 114:615–627

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Karl A, Birbaumer N, LutzenbergerW etal (2001) Reorganization of motor and somatosensory cortex in upper extremity amputees with phantom limb pain. J Neurosci 21:3609–3618

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Kew JJ, Ridding MC, Rothwell JC et al (1994) Reorganization of cortical blood flow and transcranial magne- tic Stimulation maps in human sub- jects after upper limb amputation. J Neurophysiol 72:2517–2524

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lotze M, Flor H, Grodd W et al (2001) Phantom movements and pain. An fMRI study in upper limb amputees. Brain 124:2268–2277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nikolajsen L, IlkjaerS, Jensen TS (2000) Relationship between me- chanical sensitivity and postamputation pain: a prospective study. Eur J Pain 4:327–334

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. NikolajsenL, IlkjaerS, KronerKetal (1997) The influence of preamputa- tion pain on postamputation stump and phantom pain. Pain 72:393–405

    Google Scholar 

  20. Flor H, Türk DC (2011) Chronic pain: an integrated biobehavioral appro- ach. IASP Press, Seattle/WA

    Google Scholar 

  21. HardenRN, HouleTT, GreenSetal (2005) Biofeedback in the treatment of phantom limb pain: a time-se- ries analysis. Appl Psychophysiol Biofeedback 30:83–93

    Google Scholar 

  22. Moura VL, Faurot KR, Gaylord SA et al (2012) Mind-body interventions for treatment of phantom limb pain in persons with amputation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 91:701–714

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lotze M, Grodd W, Birbaumer N et al (1999) Does use of a myoelectric prosthesis prevent cortical reorganisation and phantom limb pain? Nat Neurosci 2:501–502

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. WeissT, Miltner WH, AdlerT etal (1999) Decrease in phantom limb pain associated with prosthesis-in- duced increased use of an amputation stump in humans. Neurosci Lett 272:131–134

    Google Scholar 

  25. Dietrich C, Walter-Walsh K, Preissler S et al (2012) Sensory feedback prosthesis reduces phantom limb pain: proof of a principle. Neurosci Lett 507:97–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Flor H, Denke C, Schaefer M et al (2001) Effect ofsensory discrimina- tion training on cortical reorganisation and phantom limb pain. Lancet 375:1763–1764

    Google Scholar 

  27. Huse E, Preissl H, Larbig W et al (2001) Phantom limb pain. Lancet 358:101–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Ramachandran VS, Rogers Ramachandran D, Cobb S (1995) Touching the phantom limb. Nature 377:48949–0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Brodie EE, Whyte A, Waller B (2003) Increased motor control of a phantom leg in humans results from the Visual feedback of a Virtual leg. Neurosci Lett 341:167–169

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Hunter JP, Katz J, Davis KD (2003) The effect of tactile and Visual sensory inputs on phantom limb awareness. Brain 126:579–589

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Brodie EE, Whyte A, Niven CA (2007) Analgesia through the looking- glass? A randomized controlled tri- al investigating the effect of viewing a, Virtual' limb upon phantom limb pain, sensation and movement. Eur J Pain 11:428–436

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Chan BL, Witt R, Charrow AP et al (2007) Mirror therapy for phantom limb pain. N Engl J Med 357:2206220–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. HalliganPW, Hunt M, Marshall JC et al (1996) When seeing is feeling; acquired synaesthesia or phantom touch? Neurocase 2:21 –29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Rock I, Victor J (1964) Vision and touch: an experimentally created conflict between the two senses. Science 143:594–596

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Diers M, Christmann C, Koeppe C etal (2010) Mirrored, imagined and executed movements differentially activate sensorimotor cortex in am- putees with and without phantom limb pain. Pain 149:296–304

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. MoseleyGL, GallaceA, SpenceC (2008) Is mirror therapy all it is cra- cked up to be? Current evidence and future directions. Pain 138:7–10

    Google Scholar 

  37. Ersland L, Rosen G, Lundervold A et al (1996) Phantom limb imagina- ry fingertapping causes primary motor cortex activation: an fMRI study. Neuroreport 8:207–210

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Roux FE, Ibarrola D, Lazorthes Y et al (2001) Virtual movements activate primary sensorimotor areas in am- putees: report of three cases. Neuro- surgery 49:736–742

    Google Scholar 

  39. Mercier C, Reilly KT, Vargas CD et al (2006) Mapping phantom movement representations in the motor cortex ofamputees. Brain 129:2202221–0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Giraux P, Sirigu A (2003) lllusory movements of the paralyzed limb restore motor cortex activity. Neuroimage 20(Suppl 1):107–111

    Google Scholar 

  41. Madver K, Lloyd DM, Kelly S et al (2008) Phantom limb pain, cortical reorganization and the therapeu- tic effect of mental imagery. Brain 131:2181–2191

    Google Scholar 

  42. Moseley GL (2006) Graded motor imagery for pathologic pain. A randomized controlled trial. Neurology 67:2129–2134

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. ColeJ, CrowleS, AustwickGetal (2009) Exploratory findings with Virtual reality for phantom limb pain; from stump motion to agency and analgesia. Disabil Rehabil 31:846- 85–4

    Google Scholar 

  44. Sato K, Fukumori S, Matsusaki T et al (2010) Nonimmersive Virtual reality mirror Visual feedback therapy and its application for the treatment of complex regional pain Syndrome: an open-label pilot study. Pain Med 11:622–629

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Alviar MJ, HaleT, Dungca M (2011) Pharmacologic interventions for treating phantom limb pain. Cochra- ne Database Syst Rev:CD006380

    Google Scholar 

  46. Moseley GL, Flor H (2012) Targeting cortical representations in the treatment of chronic pain: a review. Neu- rorehabil Neural Repair 26:646–652

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institut für Neuropsychologie und Klinische Psychologie, Zentralinstitut für Seelische Gesundheit, Medizinische Fakultät Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Heidelberg, Mannheim

    M. Diers & H. Flor

Authors
  1. M. Diers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. H. Flor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Migräne- und Kopfschmerzzentrum Neurologisch-verhaltensmedizinische Schmerzklinik Kiel, Heikendorfer Weg 9–27, 24149, Kiel

    H. Göbel

  2. Kliniken und Poliklinik für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus, Fetscherstr. 74, 01307, Dresden

    H. Sabatowski

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Diers, M., Flor, H. (2013). Phantomschmerz. In: Göbel, H., Sabatowski, H. (eds) Weiterbildung Schmerzmedizin. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40740-6_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40740-6_7

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-40739-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-40740-6

  • eBook Packages: Medicine (German Language)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation