Charles Benaim

Charles Benaim


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

28Years (1999-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
16 August 2021 in Rheumatology International
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BABérengère Aubry-Rozier
Bérengère Aubry-Rozier
ASAdrien Schwitzguebel
Adrien Schwitzguebel
FVFlore Valerio
Flore Valerio
JTJoelle Tanniger
Joelle Tanniger
CPCélia Paquier
Célia Paquier
CBCharles Benaim
Charles Benaim
Diagnosing hypermobile Ehlers–Danlos syndrome (hEDS) remains challenging, despite new 2017 criteria. Patients not fulfilling these criteria are considered to have hypermobile spectrum disorder (HSD). Our first aim was to evaluate whether patients hEDS were more severely affected and had higher prevalence of extra-articular manifestations than HSD. Second aim was to compare their outcome after coordinated physical therapy. Patients fulfilling hEDS/HSD criteria were included in this real-life prospective cohort (November 2017/April 2019). They completed a 16-item Clinical Severity Score (CSS-16). We recorded bone involvement, neuropathic pain (DN4) and symptoms of mast cell disorders (MCAS) as extra-articular manifestations. After a standardized initial evaluation (T0), all patients were offered the same coordinated physical therapy, were followed-up at 6 months (T1) and at least 1 year later (T2), and were asked whether or not their condition had subjectively improved at T2. We included 97 patients (61 hEDS, 36 HSD). Median age was 40 (range 18–73); 92.7% were females. Three items from CSS-16 (pain, motricity problems, and bleeding) were significantly more severe with hEDS than HSD. Bone fragility, neuropathic pain and MCAS were equally prevalent. At T2 (20 months [range 18–26]) 54% of patients reported improvement (no difference between groups). On multivariable analysis, only family history of hypermobility predicted (favorable) outcome (p = 0.01). hEDS and HDS patients showed similar disease severity score except for pain, motricity problems and bleeding, and similar spectrum of extra-articular manifestations. Long-term improvement was observed in > 50% of patients in both groups. These results add weight to a clinical pragmatic proposition to consider hEDS/HSD as a single entity that requires the same treatments.

5 January 2019 in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CBCharles Benaim
Charles Benaim
SBSimon Blaser
Simon Blaser
BLBertrand Léger
Bertrand Léger
PVPhilippe Vuistiner
Philippe Vuistiner
FLFrançois Luthi
François Luthi
Functional tests are widely used to measure performance in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain. Our objective was to determine the Minimal Clinically Important Differences (MCID) for the 6-min walk test (6MWT), the Steep Ramp Test (SRT), the 1-min stair climbing test (1MSCT), the sit-to-stand test (STS), the Jamar dynamometer test (JAM) and the lumbar Progressive Isoinertial Lifting Evaluation (PILE) in chronic musculoskeletal pain patients. A single-center prospective observational study was conducted in a rehabilitation center. Patients with upper-limb, lower-limb or neck/back lesions were included over a period of 21 months. We used the anchor-based method as a reference method, supplemented by the distribution-based and opinion-based approaches, to determine the MCIDs. 838 chronic musculoskeletal pain patients were included. The estimation method and thelesion location had a significant influence on the results. MCIDs were estimated at +75m and +60m for the 6MWT (lower-limb and neck/back lesions, respectively), +18 steps for the 1MSCT (lower-limb and neck/back lesions) and +6kg for the JAM (upper limb lesions). The anchor-based method could not provide valid estimations for the three other scales, but distribution and opinion-based methods provided rough values of MCIDs for the SRT (+39w to +61w), the STS (-5 sec to -7 sec) and the PILE (+4kg to +7kg). The above MCID estimations for the 6MWT, 1MSCT and JAM can be used in chronic musculoskeletal pain patients participating in vocational multidisciplinary rehabilitation programs or in therapeutic trials. The use of specific anchors might give better estimations of MCIDs for the three other scales in future research.

15 December 2023 in Healthcare
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
ECElizabeth Chaplin
Elizabeth Chaplin
CKChristos Karatzios
Christos Karatzios
CBCharles Benaim
Charles Benaim
(1) Background: VR is based on a virtual world that creates sounds effects and videos that replace the real environment. Arising literature shows VR efficacy in the field of neurological rehabilitation (NR) and that its use is also taking a place in musculoskeletal rehabilitation (MSR), as a treatment of various disorders that cause disability and chronic pain. (2) Aim: We discuss the role of VR in MSR, presenting its use and development on acute and chronic musculoskeletal disorders, based on the most recent literature. (3) Design and Methods: Literature searches were conducted in the databases Pubmed and Medline up to 30 September 2023. The PRISMA-Scr Checklist was followed. (4) Results: A total of 51 records were included. The analysed studies were conducted within a variety of populations, musculoskeletal disorders, settings, and VR technologies. Only a few studies could statistically affirm the efficacy of VR in MSR, as mentioned for the rehabilitation of the upper limb. Nevertheless, the observed trend is an improvement of the global perceived effect compared to traditional rehabilitation. (5) Conclusion: VR allows for the personalisation of treatment with an adaptable treatment platform, which may improve the participation of the patient and increase acceptability and adherence to long-term rehabilitation programs. We provide recommendations and suggestions for future research and use of VR in musculoskeletal rehabilitation.

1 May 2022 in Annals of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CBCharles Benaim
Charles Benaim
GWGrégoire Wauquiez
Grégoire Wauquiez
DPDominic Pérennou
Dominic Pérennou
CPCeline Piscicelli
Celine Piscicelli
BLBrigitte Lucas-Pineau
Brigitte Lucas-Pineau
HDHervé Devilliers
Hervé Devilliers
The Mini Mental State Examination and Montreal Cognitive Assessment are commonly used as short screening batteries for assessing cognitive impairment after stroke. However, aphasia or hemispatial neglect may interfere with the results. For this reason, we developed the Cognitive Assessment scale for Stroke Patients (CASP), which takes these conditions into consideration and previously demonstrated its superiority over these scales in terms of feasibility. Our goal was to verify the psychometric properties of the (original) French version of the CASP. We included 201 patients with a recent first hemispheric stroke and 50 controls. Stroke patients were examined 4 times (visit 1 [V1] to visit 4 [V4]) in the subacute post-stroke phase. The structural validity of the CASP was studied by principal factorial analysis, convergent validity by comparison with several variables including a comprehensive neuropsychological assessment, divergent validity by comparison with the total score between stroke patients and controls, and sub-scores between right and left stroke. Internal consistency, reproducibility and sensitivity to change were assessed. We propose the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) value and a pathological threshold as well as a threshold to predict cognitive change between V1 and V4. Of the 201 participants included (63% male; mean [SD] age 63 [13] years), CASP data were available for 199/150/133/93 at V1/V2/V3/V4, respectively. CASP has a one-dimensional structure. The hypotheses of convergent/divergent validities were confirmed. Internal consistency was good and reliability excellent. Responsiveness was small to moderate, but the MCID could still be estimated. We discuss the choice of a pathological threshold and a predictive threshold of V1 over V4. CASP has good psychometric properties for screening cognitive impairment in the subacute post-stroke phase, which is consistent with its Italian and Korean versions. It can be used for patients with severe motor aphasia or left hemispatial neglect but not in case of severe oral comprehension or visual impairment.

4 November 2019 in JMIR Medical Informatics
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ASAdrien Schwitzguebel
Adrien Schwitzguebel
CJClarisse Jeckelmann
Clarisse Jeckelmann
RGRoberto Gavinio
Roberto Gavinio
CLCécile Levallois
Cécile Levallois
CBCharles Benaim
Charles Benaim
HSHervé Spechbach
Hervé Spechbach
Background: Automated medical history–taking devices (AMHTDs) are emerging tools with the potential to increase the quality of medical consultations by providing physicians with an exhaustive, high-quality, standardized anamnesis and differential diagnosis. Objective: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of an AMHTD to obtain an accurate differential diagnosis in an outpatient service. Methods: We conducted a pilot randomized controlled trial involving 59 patients presenting to an emergency outpatient unit and suffering from various conditions affecting the limbs, the back, and the chest wall. Resident physicians were randomized into 2 groups, one assisted by the AMHTD and one without access to the device. For each patient, physicians were asked to establish an exhaustive differential diagnosis based on the anamnesis and clinical examination. In the intervention group, residents read the AMHTD report before performing the anamnesis. In both the groups, a senior physician had to establish a differential diagnosis, considered as the gold standard, independent of the resident’s opinion and AMHTD report. Results: A total of 29 patients were included in the intervention group and 30 in the control group. Differential diagnosis accuracy was higher in the intervention group (mean 75%, SD 26%) than in the control group (mean 59%, SD 31%; P=.01). Subgroup analysis showed a between-group difference of 3% (83% [17/21]-80% [14/17]) for low complexity cases (1-2 differential diagnoses possible) in favor of the AMHTD (P=.76), 31% (87% [13/15]-56% [18/33]) for intermediate complexity (3 differential diagnoses; P=.02), and 24% (63% [34/54]-39% [14/35]) for high complexity (4-5 differential diagnoses; P=.08). Physicians in the intervention group (mean 4.3, SD 2) had more years of clinical practice compared with the control group (mean 5.5, SD 2; P=.03). Differential diagnosis accuracy was negatively correlated to case complexity (r=0.41; P=.001) and the residents’ years of practice (r=0.04; P=.72). The AMHTD was able to determine 73% (SD 30%) of correct differential diagnoses. Patient satisfaction was good (4.3/5), and 26 of 29 patients (90%) considered that they were able to accurately describe their symptomatology. In 8 of 29 cases (28%), residents considered that the AMHTD helped to establish the differential diagnosis. Conclusions: The AMHTD allowed physicians to make more accurate differential diagnoses, particularly in complex cases. This could be explained not only by the ability of the AMHTD to make the right diagnoses, but also by the exhaustive anamnesis provided.

1 February 2017 in Pain Research and Management
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
CBCharles Benaim
Charles Benaim
BLBertrand Léger
Bertrand Léger
PVPhilippe Vuistiner
Philippe Vuistiner
FLFrançois Luthi
François Luthi
Background. The “Patterns of Activity Measure” (POAM-P) is a self-administered questionnaire that assesses “avoidance”, “pacing” and “overdoing” activity patterns in chronic pain patients.Objectives. To adapt the POAM-P to French (“POAM-P/F”) and test its validity and reliability in Chronic Musculo-Skeletal Pain patients (CMSP).Methods. We followed the recommended procedure for translation of questionnaires. Five hundred and ninety five inpatients, admitted to a tertiary rehab center in the French-speaking part of Switzerland for chronic pain after orthopedic trauma, were included (sex ratio M/F = 4.36, mean age43±12). Face, content and criterion validities, internal consistency and reliability were assessed. Data included: TAMPA Scale for Kinesiophobia (TSK), Chronic Pain Coping Inventory (CPCI), Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS), Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS).Results. Face and content validities were checked during the translation process. Correlations between POAM-P/F-avoidance and TSK, POAM-P/F-pacing and CPCI-pacing, POAM-P/F-overdoing and CPCI-task persistence were highly significant (r>0.3,p<10-2). The three subscales demonstrated excellent homogeneity (Cronbach’s alpha coefficients > 0.8) and test-retest reliability (Intraclass Correlation Coefficients > 0.8). They correlated very differently with the other scales.Discussion and Conclusion. The three POAM-P/F subscales clearly assess different behaviors in CMSP. The POAM-P/F is a suitable questionnaire for classifying French speaking CMSP into avoiders, pacers or overdoers.