Literature DB >> 35761769

Short- and long-term effects of conventional spinal cord stimulation on chronic pain and health perceptions: A longitudinal controlled trial.

Silviu Brill1, Ruth Defrin2, Itay Goor Aryeh3, Adva Meseritz Zusman4, Yael Benyamini4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness and long-term outcomes of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) are not fully established, especially considering that data from patients who withdrew from the trial are rarely analysed, which may lead to overestimation of SCS efficacy. We evaluated short- and long-term effects of SCS on chronic pain and perceived health, beyond natural variability in these outcomes.
METHODS: In a prospective design, 176 chronic pain patients referred to SCS were evaluated five times (baseline; retest ~6 weeks later; post-SCS trial; 8 and 28 weeks post-permanent implantation). Patients whose SCS trial failed (Temp group) were followed up and compared to those who underwent permanent SCS (Perm group).
RESULTS: Analyses revealed a non-linear (U-shaped) trend significantly different between the two groups. In the Perm group, a significant improvement occurred post-SCS implantation in pain severity, pain interference, health-related quality of life and self-rated health, which was followed by gradual worsening and return to baseline values at end of follow-up. In the Temp group, only minor changes occurred in these outcomes over time. On average, baseline and end of follow-up values in the Perm and Temp groups were similar: ~40% in each group exhibited an increase in pain severity over time and 38% and 33%, respectively, exhibited reductions in pain severity over time.
CONCLUSIONS: Since the greatest improvement in the outcome measures occurred from baseline to post-SCS trial (T1-T3) followed by a gradual decline in the effect, it appears that SCS may not be effective for the majority of chronic pain patients. SIGNIFICANCE: This longitudinal study evaluated short and long term effects of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) on chronic pain outcome measures, beyond their natural variation in time. Despite significant short term improvements, by the end of the seven months' follow-up, the outcomes in the treatment group (people who received the permanent implantation) were similar to those of the control group (people whose SCS trial failed and did not continue to permanent implantation) suggesting SCS may not be cost-effective for chronic pain patients.
© 2022 The Authors. European Journal of Pain published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Pain Federation - EFIC ®.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35761769      PMCID: PMC9543320          DOI: 10.1002/ejp.2002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Pain        ISSN: 1090-3801            Impact factor:   3.651


  40 in total

Review 1.  Self-rated health and mortality: a review of twenty-seven community studies.

Authors:  E L Idler; Y Benyamini
Journal:  J Health Soc Behav       Date:  1997-03

2.  Systematic review and meta-analysis of placebo/sham controlled randomised trials of spinal cord stimulation for neuropathic pain.

Authors:  Rui V Duarte; Sarah Nevitt; Ewan McNicol; Rod S Taylor; Eric Buchser; Richard B North; Sam Eldabe
Journal:  Pain       Date:  2020-01       Impact factor: 6.961

Review 3.  Patient selection for spinal cord stimulators: mental health perspective.

Authors:  Kari A Stephens; Alison Ward
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2014-03

4.  Pain reports by older adults in long-term care: a pilot study of changes over time.

Authors:  Margaret C Gibson; M Gail Woodbury; Kim Hay; Nancy Bol
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 3.037

5.  Complications of epidural spinal stimulation: lessons from the past and alternatives for the future.

Authors:  Giuliano Taccola; Sean Barber; Phillip J Horner; Humberto A Cerrel Bazo; Dimitry Sayenko
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2020-06-23       Impact factor: 2.772

6.  The McGill Pain Questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods.

Authors:  Ronald Melzack
Journal:  Pain       Date:  1975-09       Impact factor: 6.961

7.  Spinal cord stimulation for chronic refractory pain: Long-term effectiveness and safety data from a multicentre registry.

Authors:  Andrei Brinzeu; Emmanuel Cuny; Denys Fontaine; Patrick Mertens; Pierre-Philippe Luyet; Carine Van den Abeele; Marie-Christine Djian
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2019-04-01       Impact factor: 3.931

8.  Long-term outcomes of spinal cord stimulation with paddle leads in the treatment of complex regional pain syndrome and failed back surgery syndrome.

Authors:  Nathaniel C Sears; Andre G Machado; Sean J Nagel; Milind Deogaonkar; Michael Stanton-Hicks; Ali R Rezai; Jaimie M Henderson
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2011-07-07

9.  Spinal Cord Stimulation for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome -- Patient Selection Considerations.

Authors:  Nicole Palmer; Zhonghui Guan; Nu Cindy Chai
Journal:  Transl Perioper Pain Med       Date:  2019-06-21

10.  Determinants for Meaningful Clinical Improvement of Pain and Health-Related Quality of Life After Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Intractable Pain.

Authors:  Wuilker Knoner Campos; Marcelo Neves Linhares; Jamir Sarda; Adair Roberto Soares Santos; Júlio Licinio; João Quevedo; Kátia Lin; Roger Walz
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2018-12-10
View more
  1 in total

1.  Short- and long-term effects of conventional spinal cord stimulation on chronic pain and health perceptions: A longitudinal controlled trial.

Authors:  Silviu Brill; Ruth Defrin; Itay Goor Aryeh; Adva Meseritz Zusman; Yael Benyamini
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2022-07-07       Impact factor: 3.651

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.