ReviewEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2025
Overview of Cochrane Systematic Reviews for rehabilitation interventions in persons with amputation: a mapping synthesis.
Review in European journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Multimodal Approaches for Pain Management and Improving Functional Outcomes Following Amputation.Journal of orthopaedics and sports medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis review aimed to collect the current evidence from the Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) concerning interventions for rehabilitation of people with amputation, in the context of the World Health Organization - Package of Interventions for Rehabilitation. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The Cochrane Rehabilitation team led the CSRs' search. Search strings were composed of "amputation" and "rehabilitation" and run in the Cochrane Library. We used the AMSTAR 2 to assess the methodological quality of the included CSRs. All rehabilitation-relevant data were summarized in an evidence map. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Out of the 95 CSRs found, eight related to people with amputation and rehabilitation. We found very low-certainty evidence to support the use of gabapentin in treating phantom limb pain. There was very low-certainty evidence against the use of memantine. Very low-certainty evidence showed faster wound healing, shorter time gaps from amputation to first prosthetic fit, shorter hospital stays and short-term changes in swelling after rigid dressing for people with transtibial amputations. Very low-certainty evidence revealed no difference for mobility assessment or adverse events after different forms of motor rehabilitation after transtibial amputation.
conclusionsEvidence for interventions for rehabilitation after amputation is scarce and the available evidence is of very low certainty. More studies of higher quality are needed to provide evidence to ensure that people with an amputation receive the best rehabilitation possible.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.