Spinal cord injury pain classification

History, current trends, and commentary

J. Scott Richards, Philip Siddall, Thomas Bryce, Marcel Dijkers, Diana D. Cardenas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Pain following spinal cord injury (SCI) has been well described in the literature over the years, but both SCI pain research and clinical care have been hampered by the lack of a uniform method for assessing pain. There have been a large number of proposed classification systems published, but no consensus to date on what criteria are required for each subtype of pain or the procedures to be used to make that determination. Accordingly, the literature is filled with descriptions of clinical series and some controlled trials of the treatment of SCI pain with no clear idea as to what percentage of the sample experienced neuropathic pain, musculoskeletal pain, or both. The more recent literature has been more specific with trials directed at specific subtypes of SCI pain. In this article, we review the history of SCI classification schemes, describe current efforts to develop a unified classification scheme and an accompanying set of diagnostic procedures, and describe international efforts along these lines. We also describe translational work related to SCI pain and the benefits and shortcomings of current animal models of SCI pain. Finally, several of the authors provide comments on the direction they think the field needs to take to continue to move this line of inquiry further.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-19
Number of pages19
JournalTopics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation
Volume13
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2007
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Spinal Cord Injuries
History
Pain
Musculoskeletal Pain
Neuralgia
Consensus
Animal Models
Research

Keywords

  • Classification
  • Pain
  • Spinal cord injury
  • Translational research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Neurology
  • Rehabilitation

Cite this

Spinal cord injury pain classification : History, current trends, and commentary. / Richards, J. Scott; Siddall, Philip; Bryce, Thomas; Dijkers, Marcel; Cardenas, Diana D.

In: Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation, Vol. 13, No. 2, 01.09.2007, p. 1-19.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Richards, J. Scott ; Siddall, Philip ; Bryce, Thomas ; Dijkers, Marcel ; Cardenas, Diana D. / Spinal cord injury pain classification : History, current trends, and commentary. In: Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation. 2007 ; Vol. 13, No. 2. pp. 1-19.
@article{a34680defe4a489184f8e1eea888b281,
title = "Spinal cord injury pain classification: History, current trends, and commentary",
abstract = "Pain following spinal cord injury (SCI) has been well described in the literature over the years, but both SCI pain research and clinical care have been hampered by the lack of a uniform method for assessing pain. There have been a large number of proposed classification systems published, but no consensus to date on what criteria are required for each subtype of pain or the procedures to be used to make that determination. Accordingly, the literature is filled with descriptions of clinical series and some controlled trials of the treatment of SCI pain with no clear idea as to what percentage of the sample experienced neuropathic pain, musculoskeletal pain, or both. The more recent literature has been more specific with trials directed at specific subtypes of SCI pain. In this article, we review the history of SCI classification schemes, describe current efforts to develop a unified classification scheme and an accompanying set of diagnostic procedures, and describe international efforts along these lines. We also describe translational work related to SCI pain and the benefits and shortcomings of current animal models of SCI pain. Finally, several of the authors provide comments on the direction they think the field needs to take to continue to move this line of inquiry further.",
keywords = "Classification, Pain, Spinal cord injury, Translational research",
author = "Richards, {J. Scott} and Philip Siddall and Thomas Bryce and Marcel Dijkers and Cardenas, {Diana D.}",
year = "2007",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1310/sci1302-1",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
pages = "1--19",
journal = "Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation",
issn = "1082-0744",
publisher = "Thomas Land Publishers Inc.",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Spinal cord injury pain classification

T2 - History, current trends, and commentary

AU - Richards, J. Scott

AU - Siddall, Philip

AU - Bryce, Thomas

AU - Dijkers, Marcel

AU - Cardenas, Diana D.

PY - 2007/9/1

Y1 - 2007/9/1

N2 - Pain following spinal cord injury (SCI) has been well described in the literature over the years, but both SCI pain research and clinical care have been hampered by the lack of a uniform method for assessing pain. There have been a large number of proposed classification systems published, but no consensus to date on what criteria are required for each subtype of pain or the procedures to be used to make that determination. Accordingly, the literature is filled with descriptions of clinical series and some controlled trials of the treatment of SCI pain with no clear idea as to what percentage of the sample experienced neuropathic pain, musculoskeletal pain, or both. The more recent literature has been more specific with trials directed at specific subtypes of SCI pain. In this article, we review the history of SCI classification schemes, describe current efforts to develop a unified classification scheme and an accompanying set of diagnostic procedures, and describe international efforts along these lines. We also describe translational work related to SCI pain and the benefits and shortcomings of current animal models of SCI pain. Finally, several of the authors provide comments on the direction they think the field needs to take to continue to move this line of inquiry further.

AB - Pain following spinal cord injury (SCI) has been well described in the literature over the years, but both SCI pain research and clinical care have been hampered by the lack of a uniform method for assessing pain. There have been a large number of proposed classification systems published, but no consensus to date on what criteria are required for each subtype of pain or the procedures to be used to make that determination. Accordingly, the literature is filled with descriptions of clinical series and some controlled trials of the treatment of SCI pain with no clear idea as to what percentage of the sample experienced neuropathic pain, musculoskeletal pain, or both. The more recent literature has been more specific with trials directed at specific subtypes of SCI pain. In this article, we review the history of SCI classification schemes, describe current efforts to develop a unified classification scheme and an accompanying set of diagnostic procedures, and describe international efforts along these lines. We also describe translational work related to SCI pain and the benefits and shortcomings of current animal models of SCI pain. Finally, several of the authors provide comments on the direction they think the field needs to take to continue to move this line of inquiry further.

KW - Classification

KW - Pain

KW - Spinal cord injury

KW - Translational research

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=35348955241&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=35348955241&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1310/sci1302-1

DO - 10.1310/sci1302-1

M3 - Article

VL - 13

SP - 1

EP - 19

JO - Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation

JF - Topics in Spinal Cord Injury Rehabilitation

SN - 1082-0744

IS - 2

ER -