This letter is in review of a recent published article by Hsiao and colleagues.
- Hsiao A.F.
- York R.
- Hsiao I.
- et al.
A randomized controlled study to evaluate the efficacy of noninvasive limb cover for chronic phantom limb pain among veteran amputees.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012; 93: 617-622
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
One-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:Subscribe to Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
- A randomized controlled study to evaluate the efficacy of noninvasive limb cover for chronic phantom limb pain among veteran amputees.Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012; 93: 617-622
© 2012 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
ScienceDirectAccess this article on ScienceDirect
- A Randomized Controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy of Noninvasive Limb Cover for Chronic Phantom Limb Pain Among Veteran AmputeesArchives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationVol. 93Issue 4
- The Authors RespondArchives of Physical Medicine and RehabilitationVol. 93Issue 11
- PreviewThis is a response to Nixdorf's letter regarding our published article.1 The reader asserts that our study “does not appear to have followed the reported protocol for the research, as published by the funding agency, the National Foundation of Alternative Medicine.” The reader noted that the noninvasive limb cover, Farabloc, is customarily laminated into the prosthesis to “avoid uneven material worn over a limb, which could cause pressure spots and pain when inserted into a prosthesis.” Because our study cut a hole in the limb cover in order to fit over the prosthesis, the reader believes that this “might compromise the integrity of the cover … and the reported data and its conclusion are likely not reliable.”