Literature DB >> 7643988

Prognostic factors of spinal cord stimulation for chronic back and leg pain.

K J Burchiel1, V C Anderson, B J Wilson, D B Denison, K A Olson, D Shatin.   

Abstract

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) has been used for more than 20 years in the treatment of diverse pain conditions. Although recent studies have identified more clearly those conditions for which SCSoffers a favorable prognosis, the identification of a patient population in whom reasonably long-term success can be expected has been difficult. In an effort to improve patient selection and increase the overall success rate of treatment, we have examined various physical, demographic, and psychosocial variables as predictors of SCS outcome. The study population consisted of 40 patients with chronic low back and/or leg pain, 85% of whom were diagnosed with failed back surgery syndrome. Medical history and demographic data were collected as part of an initial assessment along with patient responses to the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, the visual analogue pain rating scale (VAS), the McGill Pain Questionnaire, the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, the Beck Depression Inventory, and the Sickness Impact Profile. Treatment outcomes were examined and found to improve significantly after 3 months of stimulation. Subsequent regression analysis revealed that patient age, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory depression subscale D, and the evaluative subscale of the McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQe) were important predictors of posttreatment pain status. Increased patient age and D subscale scores correlated negatively with pain status, as measured by the percentage of changes in pretreatment and posttreatment VAS scores, % delta VAS. In contrast, higher MPQe correlated with improved pain status. By the use of the following equation and the definition commonly associated with SCS success (at least 50% decrease in the VAS pain level), the success or failure of 3 months of SCS was correctly predicted in 88% of the study population. Our results suggest that patient age, Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory depression, and MPQe may be clinically useful in the prediction of pain status after 3 months of SCS in patients with chronic low back and/or leg pain. % delta VAS = 112.57 - 1.98 (D)-1.68 (Age) + 35.54 (MPQe).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7643988     DOI: 10.1227/00006123-199506000-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  18 in total

1.  Failed back surgery syndrome: a suggested algorithm of care.

Authors:  Praveen Ganty; Manohar Sharma
Journal:  Br J Pain       Date:  2012-11

Review 2.  Health related quality of life outcome instruments.

Authors:  Gunnar Németh
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-12-01       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Psychological screening/phenotyping as predictors for spinal cord stimulation.

Authors:  Claudia M Campbell; Robert N Jamison; Robert R Edwards
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2013-01

Review 4.  Peripheral nerve stimulation for the treatment of primary headache.

Authors:  Pyungbok Lee; Billy K Huh
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2013-03

5.  The association of presurgery psychological symptoms with postsurgery pain among cancer patients receiving implantable devices for pain management.

Authors:  Carrie J Aigner; Mike Hernandez; Lakshmi Koyyalagunta; Diane Novy
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2014-03-29       Impact factor: 3.603

6.  Assessment of biopsychosocial risk factors for medical treatment: a collaborative approach.

Authors:  Daniel Bruns; John Mark Disorbio
Journal:  J Clin Psychol Med Settings       Date:  2009-02-10

7.  Participant's perception of negative cognition in low back pain: a pilot study.

Authors:  Timothy A Mirtz; Leon Greene; Mark A Thompson
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2006

8.  The pattern of physical comorbidity and the psychosocial determinants of depression: a prospective cohort study on a representative sample of family practice attendees in Slovenia.

Authors:  Polona Selič; Igor Svab; Janez Rifel; Danica Rotar Pavlič; Anja Cerne; Michael King; Irwin Nazareth
Journal:  Ment Health Fam Med       Date:  2011-09

Review 9.  Spinal cord stimulation: principles of past, present and future practice: a review.

Authors:  Sreekumar Kunnumpurath; Ravi Srinivasagopalan; Nalini Vadivelu
Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 2.502

10.  Longer Delay From Chronic Pain to Spinal Cord Stimulation Results in Higher Healthcare Resource Utilization.

Authors:  Shivanand P Lad; Frank W Petraglia; Alexander R Kent; Steven Cook; Kelly R Murphy; Nirav Dalal; Edward Karst; Peter Staats; Ashwini Sharan
Journal:  Neuromodulation       Date:  2016-02-29
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.