Current Pain and Headache Reports

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 103–107 | Cite as

Mirror visual feedback for the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome (type 1)

  • Candida S. McCabeEmail author
  • Richard C. Haigh
  • David R. Blake


Mirror visual feedback was originally devised as a therapeutic tool to relieve perceived involuntarily movements and paralysis in the phantom limb. Since this pioneering work was conducted in the mid-1990s, the technique has been applied to relieve pain and enhance movement in other chronic conditions such as stroke and complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS) type 1. This review describes how mirror visual feedback was first developed with amputees, its original application in CRPS, and how further research has demonstrated its potential benefit within graded motor imagery programs. We discuss the potential mechanisms behind this technique and consider the implications for clinical practice.


Motor Imagery Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Sensory Feedback Phantom Limb Phantom Limb Pain 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References and Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Gregory R: Mirrors in Mind. London: Penguin; 1997:1–2.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ramachandran VS, Rogers-Ramachandran D: Synaesthesia in phantom limbs induced with mirrors. Proc Biol Sci 1996, 263:377–386.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brodie EE, Whyte A, Niven CA: Analgesia through the looking-glass? A randomized controlled trial investigating the effect of viewing a ‘virtual’ limb upon phantom limb pain, sensation and movement. Eur J Pain 2007, 11:428–436.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hunter JP, Katz J, Davis KD: The effect of tactile and visual sensory inputs on phantom limb awareness. Brain 2003, 126:579–589.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McCabe CS, Haigh RC, Ring EF, et al.: A controlled pilot study of the utility of mirror visual feedback in the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome (type 1). Rheumatology (Oxford) 2003, 42:97–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vladimir Tichelaar YI, Geertzen JH, Keizer D, Pail van Wilgen C: Mirror box therapy added to cognitive behavioural therapy in three chronic complex regional pain syndrome type 1 patients: a pilot study. Int J Rehabil Res 2007, 30:181–188.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Moseley GL: Graded motor imagery is effective for long-standing complex regional pain syndrome: a randomised controlled trial. Pain 2004, 108:192–198.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Moseley GL: Is successful rehabilitation of complex regional pain syndrome simply sustained attention to the affected limb? A randomised clinical trial. Pain 2005, 114:54–61.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sutbeyaz S, Yavuzer G, Sezer N, Koseoglu BF: Mirror therapy enhances lower-extremity motor recovery and motor functioning after stroke: a randomized controlled trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2007, 88:555–559.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Altschuler EL, Wisdom SB, Stone L, et al.: Rehabilitation of hemiparesis after stroke with a mirror. Lancet 1999, 353:2035–2036.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ramachandran VS, Hirstein W: The perception of phantom limbs. The D.O. Hebb lecture. Brain 1998, 121:1603–1630.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Acerra NE, Moseley GL: Dysynchiria: watching the mirror image of the unaffected limb elicits pain on the affected side. Neurology 2005, 65:751–753.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kramer HH, Seddigh S, Moseley GL, Birklein F: Dysynchiria is not a common feature of neuropathic pain. Eur J Pain 2008, 12:128–131.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chan BL, Witt R, Charrow AP: Mirror therapy for phantom limb pain. N Engl J Med 2007, 357:2206–2207.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brodie EE, Whyte A, Waller B: Increased motor control of a phantom leg in humans results from the visual feedback of a virtual leg. Neurosci Lett 2003, 34:167–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stanton-Hicks M, Jänig W, Hassenbusch S, et al.: Reflex sympathetic dystrophy: changing concepts and taxonomy. Pain 1995, 63:127–133.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Baron R, Fields HL, Jänig W, et al.: National Institutes of Health Workshop: reflex sympathetic dystrophy/complex regional pain syndromes—state-of-the-science. Anesth Analg 2002, 95:1812–1816.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lewis JS, Kersten P, McCabe CS, et al.: Body perception disturbance: a contribution to pain in complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Pain 2007, 133:1111–1119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Moseley GL: Distorted body image in complex regional pain syndrome. Neurology 2005, 65:773.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Förderreuther S, Sailer U, Straube A: Impaired self-perception of the hand in complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). Pain 2004, 110:756–761.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McCabe CS, Haigh RC, Halligan PW, Blake DR: Referred sensations in patients with complex regional pain syndrome type 1. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2003, 42:1067–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schwoebel J, Friedman R, Duda N, Coslett HB: Pain and the body schema: evidence for peripheral effects on mental representations of movement. Brain 2001, 124:2098–2104.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Galer BS, Butler S, Jensen MP: Case reports and hypothesis: a neglect-like syndrome may be responsible for the motor disturbance in reflex sympathetic dystrophy (complex regional pain syndrome-1). J Pain Symptom Manage 1995, 10:385–391.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Giraux P, Sirigu A: Illusory movements of the paralyzed limb restore motor cortex activity. Neuroimage 2003, 20:S107–S111.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Parsons LM: Temporal and kinematic properties of motor behavior reflected in mentally stimulated action. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1994, 20:709–730.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Decety J, Perani D, Jeannerod M, et al.: Mapping motor representations with positron emission topography. Nature 1994, 371:600–602.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Moseley GL: Imagined movements cause pain and swelling in a patient with complex regional pain syndrome. Neurology 2004, 62:1644.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Melzack R: Phantom limbs and the concept of a neuromatrix. Trends Neurosci 1990, 13:88–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Moseley GL: Graded motor imagery for pathologic pain: a randomized controlled trial. Neurology 2006, 67:2129–2134.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Fink GR, Marshall JC, Halligan PW, et al.: The neural consequences of conflict between intention and the senses. Brain 1999, 122:497–512.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dettmers C, Lemon RN, Stephan KM, et al.: Cerebral activation during the exertion of sustained static force in man. Neuroreport 1996, 7:2103–2110.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sirigu A, Duhamel JR, Cohen L, et al.: The mental representation of hand movements after parietal cortex damage. Science 1996, 273:1564–1568.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    McCabe CS, Haigh RC, Halligan PW, Blake DR: Simulating sensory-motor incongruence in healthy volunteers: implications for a cortical model of pain. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2005, 44:509–516.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    McCabe CS, Blake DR: Evidence for a mismatch between the brain’s movement control system and the sensory system as an explanation for some pain-related disorders. Curr Pain Headache Rep 2007, 11:104–108.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Harris AJ: Cortical origins of pathological pain. Lancet 1999, 354:1464–1466.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Frith CD, Friston K, Liddle PF, Frackowiak RS: Willed action and the prefrontal cortex in man: a study with PET. Proc Biol Sci 1991, 244:241–246.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Batista AP, Newsome WT: Visuo-motor control: giving the brain a hand. Curr Biol 2000, 10:R145–R148.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Garry MI, Loftus A, Summers JJ: Mirror, mirror on the wall: viewing a mirror reflection of unilateral hand movements facilitates ipsilateral M1 excitability. Exp Brain Res 2005, 163:118–122.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pleger B, Tegenthoff M, Ragert P, et al.: Sensorimotor returning in complex regional pain syndrome parallels pain reduction. Ann Neurol 2005, 57:425–429. [Published erratum appears in Ann Neurol 2005, 57:609.]CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Current Medicine Group LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Candida S. McCabe
    • 1
    Email author
  • Richard C. Haigh
  • David R. Blake
  1. 1.The Royal National Hospital for Rheumatic DiseasesBathUK

Personalised recommendations