The effect of bodily illusions on clinical pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Study Goal
The researchers aimed to evaluate the effect of bodily illusions, including virtual walking illusions, on pain modulation.
Results Summary
Conflicting results were found for virtual walking illusions, with no consistent evidence of pain modulation. Some bodily illusions, such as mirror therapy and bodily resizing, showed therapeutic promise for pain reduction.
Population
Not specified (studies evaluating bodily illusions and pain modulation).
Effective Dosage
Not specified
Duration
Varied (e.g., 4-6 weeks for mirror therapy, single session for some illusions)
Interactions
None mentioned
| Intervention | Direction | Endpoint | Population | Dosage | Impact | Claim # |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
illusions of the existence of a body part (myoelectric/Sauerbruch prosthesis vs cosmetic/no prosthesis) | decrease | pain | - | standardized mean differences = -1.84, 95% CI = -2.67 to -1.00 | pain decrease | #1 |
4 to 6 weeks of mirror therapy | decrease | pain | - | standardized mean differences = -1.11, 95% CI = -1.66 to -0.56 | pain decrease | #2 |
Bodily resizing illusions | neutral | pain | - | - | pain modulation | #3 |
1 session of mirror therapy | no change | pain | - | - | no effect on pain | #4 |
incongruent movement illusions | no change | pain | - | - | no effect on pain | #5 |
incongruent movement illusion | increase | pain | - | - | significantly increased the odds of experiencing pain | #6 |
virtual walking illusions | neutral | pain | - | - | conflicting results | #7 |
resizing illusions | no change | pain | - | - | no effect on pain evoked by noxious stimuli | #8 |
embodiment illusions | no change | pain | - | - | no effect | #9 |
synchronous mirrored stroking | decrease | pain | nonresponders to traditional mirror therapy | - | significant pain decrease | #10 |
bodily illusions | neutral | pain | - | - | can alter pain | #11 |
This systematic review and meta-analysis critically examined the evidence for bodily illusions to modulate pain. Six databases were searched; 2 independent reviewers completed study inclusion, risk of bias assessment, and data extraction. Included studies evaluated the effect of a bodily illusion on pain, comparing results with a control group/condition. Of the 2213 studies identified, 20 studies (21 experiments) were included. Risk of bias was high due to selection bias and lack of blinding. Consistent evidence of pain decrease was found for illusions of the existence of a body part (myoelectric/Sauerbruch prosthesis vs cosmetic/no prosthesis; standardized mean differences = -1.84, 95% CI = -2.67 to -1.00) and 4 to 6 weeks of mirror therapy (standardized mean differences = -1.11, 95% CI = -1.66 to -0.56). Bodily resizing illusions had consistent evidence of pain modulation (in the direction hypothesized). Pooled data found no effect on pain for 1 session of mirror therapy or for incongruent movement illusions (except for comparisons with congruent mirrored movements: incongruent movement illusion significantly increased the odds of experiencing pain). Conflicting results were found for virtual walking illusions (both active and inactive control comparisons). Single studies suggest no effect of resizing illusions on pain evoked by noxious stimuli, no effect of embodiment illusions, but a significant pain decrease with synchronous mirrored stroking in nonresponders to traditional mirror therapy. There is limited evidence to suggest that bodily illusions can alter pain, but some illusions, namely mirror therapy, bodily resizing, and use of functional prostheses show therapeutic promise.