1. bookVolume 18 (2017): Issue 2 (June 2017)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2353-8627
First Published
30 Mar 2016
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English
access type Open Access

Phantom limb phenomenon as an example of body image distortion

Published Online: 01 Sep 2017
Volume & Issue: Volume 18 (2017) - Issue 2 (June 2017)
Page range: 153 - 159
Received: 27 May 2017
Accepted: 30 Jun 2017
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2353-8627
First Published
30 Mar 2016
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English
Abstract

Introduction: The perception of one’s own body, its mental representation, and emotional attitude to it are the components of so-called “body image” [1]. The aim of the research was to analyse phantom pain and non-painful phantom sensations as results of limb loss and to explain them in terms of body image distortion.

Material and method: Three methods were used in the study of 22 amputees (7 women and 15 men, between 43 and 76 years old, M = 61, SD = 11.3): (1) a clinical interview; (2) The Questionnaire of Body Experiencing after Limb Amputation; (3) modified version of The Pain Questionnaire based on The McGill Pain Questionnaire.

Results: The prevalence of phantom limb pain was 59%. Some various non-painful phantom sensations after amputation were experienced by 77% of respondents. There was a statistically significant relationship between phantom pain and non-painful phantom sensations in a group of participants experiencing phantom limb phenomenon at the moment of the research.

Conclusions: Deformation of body image in the form of phantom pain and non-painful phantom sensations is a frequent experience after limb loss. We suggest that phantom limb is a form of out-of-date or inadequate body image as an effect of the brain activity trying to keep a kind of status quo. A co-occurrence of non-painful phantom sensations and phantom pain suggests that these both forms of post-amputation sensations may share neural mechanisms. Results indicate, that there exists somatosensory memory which may be manifested in similarities between pre- and post-amputation sensations.

Keywords

1. Gallagher S, Meltzoff AN. The earliest sense of self and others: Merleau-Ponty and recent developmental studies. Philos. Psychol. 1996;9:213–36.Search in Google Scholar

2. Kułakowska Z. Wczesne uszkodzenie dojrzewającego mózgu. Od neurofizjologii do rehabilitacji. Lublin: Wydawnictwo Folium; 2003.Search in Google Scholar

3. Gallagher S, Cole J. Body image and body schema in a deafferented subject. J. Mind Behav. 1995;16:369–89.Search in Google Scholar

4. Giummarra MJ, Gibson SJ, Georgiou-Karistianis N, Bradshaw JL. Mechanisms underlying embodiment, disembodiment and loss of embodiment. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2008;32:143–60.Search in Google Scholar

5. Jeannerod M. Visual and action cues contribute to the self-other distinction. Nat. Neurosci. 2004;7:422–3.Search in Google Scholar

6. Churchland PS. Self-representation in nervous systems. Science. 2002;296:308–10.10.1126/science.1070564Search in Google Scholar

7. Sirigu A, Grafman J, Bressler K, Sunderland T. Multiple representations contribute to body knowledge processing. Evidence from a case of autotopagnosia. Brain J. Neurol. 1991;114 (Pt 1B):629–42.10.1093/brain/114.1.629Search in Google Scholar

8. Schwoebel J, Coslett HB. Evidence for multiple, distinct representations of the human body. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2005;17:543–53.Search in Google Scholar

9. Maravita A, Iriki A. Tools for the body (schema). Trends Cogn. Sci. 2004;8:79–86.Search in Google Scholar

10. Gallagher S. Body schema and intentionality. In: Bermúdez JL, Eilan N, Marcel A, editors. Body Self. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press; 2001. p. 225–44.Search in Google Scholar

11. Gallgher S. How the body shapes the mind. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005.10.1093/0199271941.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

12. Cole J, Paillard J. Living without touch and peripheral information about body position and movement: Studies with deafferented subjects. In: Bermúdez JL, Eilan N, Marcel A, editors. Body Self. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press; 2001. p. 245–66.Search in Google Scholar

13. Ehde DM, Czerniecki JM, Smith DG, Campbell KM, Edwards WT, Jensen MP, et al. Chronic phantom sensations, phantom pain, residual limb pain, and other regional pain after lower limb amputation. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 2000;81:1039–44.Search in Google Scholar

14. Goldenberg G. Disorders of body perception. In: Farah MJ, Feinberg TE, editors. Patient-Based Approaches Cogn. Neurosci. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press; 2000. p. 107–14.Search in Google Scholar

15. Hill A. Phantom limb pain: a review of the literature on attributes and potential mechanisms. J. Pain Symptom Manage. 1999;17:125–42.10.1016/S0885-3924(98)00136-5Search in Google Scholar

16. Kooijman CM, Dijkstra PU, Geertzen JH, Elzinga A, van der Schans CP. Phantom pain and phantom sensations in upper limb amputees: an epidemiological study. Pain. 2000;87:33–41.10.1016/S0304-3959(00)00264-5Search in Google Scholar

17. Nikolajsen L, Jensen TS. Phantom limb pain. Br. J. Anaesth. 2001;87:107–16.10.1093/bja/87.1.107Search in Google Scholar

18. Wolff A, Vanduynhoven E, van Kleef M, Huygen F, Pope JE, Mekhail N. 21. Phantom Pain. Pain Pract. 2011;11:403–13.10.1111/j.1533-2500.2011.00454.xSearch in Google Scholar

19. Bosmans JC, Geertzen JHB, Post WJ, van der Schans CP, Dijkstra PU. Factors associated with phantom limb pain: a 31/2-year prospective study. Clin. Rehabil. 2010;24:444–53.10.1177/0269215509360645Search in Google Scholar

20. Flor H. Phantom-limb pain: characteristics, causes, and treatment. Lancet Neurol. 2002;1:182–9.10.1016/S1474-4422(02)00074-1Search in Google Scholar

21. Flor H. Phantom limb pain. In: Ramachandran VS, editor. Encycl. Hum. Brain. New York: Elsevier Science; 2002. p. 831–41.10.1016/B0-12-227210-2/00279-XSearch in Google Scholar

22. Melzack R. From the gate to the neuromatrix. Pain. 1999;Suppl 6:S121–6.10.1016/S0304-3959(99)00145-1Search in Google Scholar

23. Schott GD. Delayed onset and resolution of pain: some observations and implications. Brain J. Neurol. 2001;124:1067–76.Search in Google Scholar

24. Whyte AS, Niven CA. Psychological distress in amputees with phantom limb pain. J. Pain Symptom Manage. 2001;22:938–46.Search in Google Scholar

25. Whyte AS, Niven CA. Variation in phantom limb pain: results of a diary study. J. Pain Symptom Manage. 2001;22:947–53.10.1016/S0885-3924(01)00356-6Search in Google Scholar

26. Montoya P, Larbig W, Grulke N, Flor H, Taub E, Birbaumer N. The relationship of phantom limb pain to other phantom limb phenomena in upper extremity amputees. Pain. 1997;72:87–93.10.1016/S0304-3959(97)00004-3Search in Google Scholar

27. Hsu E, Cohen SP. Postamputation pain: epidemiology, mechanisms, and treatment. J. Pain Res. 2013;6:121–36.Search in Google Scholar

28. Ramachandran VS, Levi L, Stone L, Rogers-Ramachandran D, McKinney R, Stalcup M, et al. Illusions of body image: What they reveal about human nature. In: Llinás R, Churchalnd PS, editors. Mind-Brain Contin. Sens. Process. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press; 1996. p. 29–61.Search in Google Scholar

29. Giummarra MJ, Georgiou-Karistianis N, Nicholls MER, Gibson SJ, Chou M, Bradshaw JL. Corporeal awareness and proprioceptive sense of the phantom. Br. J. Psychol. 2010;101:791–808.Search in Google Scholar

30. Gontarczyk M. Doświadczanie własnego ciała przez pacjentów po amputacjach kończyn [Unpublished master’s thesis]. [Lublin]: Maria Curie-Sklodowska University; 2006.Search in Google Scholar

31. Dobrogowski J, Kuś M, Sedlak K, Wordliczek J. Ból i jego leczenie. Warszawa: Springer PWN; 1996.Search in Google Scholar

32. Melzack R. The McGill Pain Questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods. Pain. 1975;1:277–99.10.1016/0304-3959(75)90044-5Search in Google Scholar

33. Flor H, Nikolajsen L, Staehelin Jensen T. Phantom limb pain: a case of maladaptive CNS plasticity? Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2006;7:873–81.Search in Google Scholar

34. Li S, Melton DH, Li S. Tactile, thermal, and electrical thresholds in patients with and without phantom limb pain after traumatic lower limb amputation. J. Pain Res. 2015;8:169–74.10.2147/JPR.S77412440895625945065Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo