# Application of diagnostic criteria in paediatric complex regional pain syndrome: a scoping review protocol

## TL;DR

This study aims to review how adult diagnostic criteria for complex regional pain syndrome are applied in children, highlighting the need for pediatric-specific tools.

## Contribution

The study introduces a scoping review protocol to evaluate the use of adult CRPS diagnostic criteria in children.

## Key findings

- Current CRPS diagnostic tools are not validated for children.
- The review will summarize existing assessment methods for diagnosing CRPS in pediatric populations.
- Findings will inform recommendations for pediatric CRPS diagnosis and treatment.

## Abstract

There are no validated paediatric-specific diagnostic criteria for complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS). As a result, diagnostic tools developed for adults (eg, Budapest Criteria, Japanese Diagnostic Criteria, Veldman Criteria) are frequently applied in the paediatric population. However, the clinical presentations and trajectories of children can differ from adults. Given that treatment outcomes are linked to early diagnosis and intervention, the lack of paediatric-specific screening or diagnostic tools is an important knowledge gap. We aim to identify the frequency of individual criteria used in diagnosing CRPS in children and adolescents in existing literature, summarise assessment methods used to establish the diagnosis, and provide recommendations for research and clinical application.

The following databases and platforms will be searched for articles published from 2003 (year the Budapest Criteria was developed) onward: CINAHL, CENTRAL, Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, PsycINFO and Web of Science. Our search strategy will use subject headings and text words related to the concepts of CRPS in paediatric populations, with study inclusion criteria from birth up to 18 years old, and a diagnosis of CRPS. Data will be extracted by our multidisciplinary team and findings will be reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews.

This study does not involve human participants or unpublished data; therefore, approval from a human research ethics committee is not required. The findings of this scoping review will be disseminated through academic conferences and peer-reviewed publications.