Objective: To determine the relationship between impairments, disability and handicap in reflex sympathetic dystrophy (RSD) patients.
Design: A long-term follow-up study of upper extremity RSD patients.
Setting: A university hospital.
Subjects: Sixty-five patients, 3–9 years (mean interval 5.5 years) after RSD of the upper extremity (mean age 50.2 years).
Main outcome measures: Impairments: range of motion, moving two point discrimination, muscle strength of the hand and pain were measured. Disability was assessed with the Groningen Activity Restriction Scale (GARS) and handicap was assessed with three subscales (social functioning, role limitations due to physical problems and role limitations due to emotional problems) of the RAND-36.
Results: After RSD of the upper extremity, 62% of the patients are limited in activities of daily living (ADL) and/or instrumental ADL (IADL). Pain and restrictions in forward flexion of the shoulder, thumb opposition and grip strength are the most important impairments limiting ADL and IADL. Patients with limitations in ADL and IADL are significantly more handicapped than patients without limitations. Pain is the most important factor contributing to handicap.
Conclusion: The relationship between impairments and disability and between disability and handicap in RSD patients is weak to moderate. Pain is the most important factor leading to disability and handicap.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Jänig W. The puzzle of ‘reflex sympathetic dystrophy’: mechanisms, hypotheses, open questions. In: Jänig W, Stanton-Hicks M eds. Reflex sympathetic dystrophy: a reappraisal. Seattle: IASP Press, 1996: 1–24.
2.
Baron R, Blumberg H, Jänig W. Clinical characteristics of patients with complex regional pain syndrome in Germany with special emphasis on vasomotor function, hypotheses, open questions. In: Jänig W, Stanton-Hicks M eds. Reflex sympathetic dystrophy: a reappraisal. Seattle: IASP Press, 1996: 25–48.
3.
Low PA, Wilson PR, Sandroni P, Willner CL, Chelimsky TC. Clinical characteristics of patients with reflex sympathetic dystrophy (sympathetically maintained pain) in the USA. In: Jänig W, Stanton-Hicks M eds. Reflex sympathetic dystrophy: a reappraisal. Seattle: IASP Press, 1996: 49–66.
4.
Amadio PC, Mackinnon S, Merrit WH et al. Reflex sympathetic dystrophy syndrome: Consensus report of an ad hoc committee of the American Association for Hand Surgery on the definition of reflex sympathetic dystrophy syndrome. Plast Reconst Surg1991; 87: 371–375.
5.
Goris RJA. Treatment of reflex sympathetic dystrophy with hydroxyl radical scavengers. Unfallchirurg1985; 88: 330–332.
6.
Kozin F, McCarth DJ, Sims J et al. The reflex sympathetic dystrophy syndrome, clinical and histological studies. Evidence for bilaterality, response to corticosteroids and articular involvement. Am J Med1976; 60: 320–323.
7.
Lankford LL. Reflex sympathetic dystrophy. In: Omer GF, Spinner M eds. Management of peripheral nerve problems. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1980: 216–244.
8.
Geertzen JHB, de Bruijn H, de Bruijn-Kofman AT, Arendzen JH. Reflex sympathetic dystrophy: early treatment and psychological aspects. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1994; 75: 442–446.
9.
Veldman PHJM. Clinical aspects of reflex sympathetic dystrophy. Thesis, University of Nijmegen, the Netherlands, 1995.
10.
WHO. International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps: a manual of classification relating to consequences of disease. Geneva: World Health Organization, 1980.
11.
Atkins R, Duckworth T, Kanis JA. Features of algodystrophy after Colles' fracture. J Bone Joint Surg1990; 72B105–110.
12.
Bickerstaff DR, Kanis JA. Algodystrophy: an underrecognized complication of minor trauma. Br J Rheumatol1994; 33: 240–248.
13.
Field J, Warwick D, Bannister C. Features of algodystrophy ten years after Colles' fracture. J Hand Surg1992; 17B: 318–320.
14.
Subbarao J, Stillwell GK. Reflex sympathetic dystrophy syndrome of the upper extremity: analysis of total outcome of management of 125 cases. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1981; 62: 549–554.
15.
Geertzen JHB, Dijkstra PU, Groothoff JW, ten Duis HJ, Eisma WH. Reflex sympathetic dystrophy of the upper extremity: a 5.5 year follow-up. Impairments and perceived disability. Acta Orthop Scand1998; 69(suppl 279): 12–18.
16.
Lee Dellon A, Kallman CH. Evaluation of functional sensation in the hand. J Hand Surg1983; 6: 865–870.
17.
Kempen GIJM, Doeglas DM, Suurmeijer ThPBM. Het meten van problemen op verzorgend en huishoudelijk gebied met de Groningen Activiteiten Restrictie Schaal (GARS): een handleiding. Noordelijk Centrum voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken, Rijks Universiteit Groningen, 1993, 1–31.
18.
Kempen GIJM, Steverinck N, Ormel J, Deeg DJH. The assessment of ADL among frail elderly in an interview survey: self-report versus performance based tests and determinants of discrepancies. J Gerontol Psychol Sci1996; 51B: 254–260.
19.
Kempen GIJM, Miedema I, Ormel J, Molenaar W. The assessment of disability with the GroningenActivity Restriction Scale. Conceptual framework and psychometric properties. Soc Sci Med1996; 34: 1601–1610.
20.
Suurmeijer ThPBM, Doeglas DM, Moum T et al. The Groningen Activity Restriction Scale for measuring disability: its utility in international comparisons. Am J Public Health1994; 84: 170–173.
21.
Zee van der K, Sanderman R, Heyink J. De psychometrische kwaliteiten van de MOS 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) in een Nederlandse populatie. T Soc Gezondheidsz 1993; 71: 183–91.
22.
Zee van der K, Sanderman R. Het meten van de algemene gezondheidstoestand met de RAND-36: een handleiding. Noordelijk Centrum voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, 1993, 1–28.
23.
Doege TC, Houston TP ed. Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment, fourth edition. Chicago: American Medical Association, 1993.
24.
Galer BS, Jensen MP. Development and preliminary validation of a pain measure specific to neuropathic pain: the neuropathic pain scale. Neurology1997; 48: 332–338.
25.
Munro BH, Visintainer MA, Batten Page E. Statistical methods for health care research. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott, 1986: 70-70.
26.
König-Zahn C, Furer JW, Tax B. Het meten van de gezondheidstoestand. Beschrijving en evaluatie van vragenlijsten. 1 Algemene gezondheid. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1993.
27.
König-Zahn C, Furer JW, Tax B. Het meten van de gezondheidstoestand. Beschrijving en evaluatie van vragenlijsten. 2 Lichamelijke gezondheid, sociale gezondheid. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1993.
28.
Furer JW, König-Zahn C, Tax B. Het meten van de gezondheidstoestand. Beschrijving en evaluatie van vragenlijsten. 3 Psychische gezondheid. Assen: Van Gorcum, 1993.
