Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation for the Management of Localized Chronic Intractable Back Pain: Results From a Randomized Controlled Study

2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 565-575 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Porter McRoberts ◽  
Richard Wolkowitz ◽  
D Joseph Meyer ◽  
Eugene Lipov ◽  
Jay Joshi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Randomized Controlled Study ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Field Stimulation ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation

scholarly journals The Added Value of Subcutaneous Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation Combined with SCS, as Salvage Therapy, for Refractory Low Back Pain Component in Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Implanted Patients: A Randomized Controlled Study (CUMPNS Study) Based on 3D-Mapping Composite Pain Assessment

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Rigoard ◽  
Amine Ounajim ◽  
Lisa Goudman ◽  
Benedicte Bouche ◽  
Manuel Roulaud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Salvage Therapy ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Field Stimulation ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation ◽  
Spinal Pain Syndrome

While Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) provides satisfaction to almost 2/3 of Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome-Type 2 (PSPS-T2) patients implanted for refractory chronic back and/or leg pain when not adequately addressed the back pain component, leaves patients in a therapeutic cul-de-sac. Peripheral Nerve field Stimulation (PNfS) has shown interesting results addressing back pain in the same population. Far from placing these two techniques in opposition, we suggest that these approaches could be combined to better treat PSPS-T2 patients. We designed a RCT (CUMPNS), with a 12-month follow-up, to assess the potential added value of PNfS, as a salvage therapy, in PSPS-T2 patients experiencing a “Failed SCS Syndrome” in the back pain component. Fourteen patients were included in this study and randomized into 2 groups (“SCS + PNfS” group/n=6 vs “SCS only” group/n=8). The primary objective of the study was to compare the percentage of back pain surface decrease after 3 months, using a computerized interface to obtain quantitative pain mappings, combined with multi-dimensional SCS outcomes. Back pain surface decreased significantly greater for the ”SCS+PNfS” group (80.2% ± 21.3%) compared to the “SCS only” group (13.2% ± 94.8%) (p=0.012), highlighting the clinical interest of SCS+PNfS, in cases where SCS fails to address back pain.

scholarly journals The Added Value of Subcutaneous Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation Combined with SCS, as Salvage Therapy, for Refractory Low Back Pain Component in Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Implanted Patients: A Randomized Controlled Study (CUMPNS Study) Based on 3D-Mapping Composite Pain Assessment

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (21) ◽  
pp. 5094
Author(s):  
Philippe Rigoard ◽  
Amine Ounajim ◽  
Lisa Goudman ◽  
Benedicte Bouche ◽  
Manuel Roulaud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Salvage Therapy ◽  
Pain Syndrome ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Field Stimulation ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation ◽  
Spinal Pain Syndrome

While Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) provides satisfaction to almost 2/3 of Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome-Type 2 (PSPS-T2) patients implanted for refractory chronic back and/or leg pain, when not adequately addressed the back pain component, leaves patients in a therapeutic cul-de-sac. Peripheral Nerve field Stimulation (PNfS) has shown interesting results addressing back pain in the same population. Far from placing these two techniques in opposition, we suggest that these approaches could be combined to better treat PSPS-T2 patients. We designed a RCT (CUMPNS), with a 12-month follow-up, to assess the potential added value of PNfS, as a salvage therapy, in PSPS-T2 patients experiencing a “Failed SCS Syndrome” in the back pain component. Fourteen patients were included in this study and randomized into 2 groups (“SCS + PNfS” group/n = 6 vs. “SCS only” group/n = 8). The primary objective of the study was to compare the percentage of back pain surface decrease after 3 months, using a computerized interface to obtain quantitative pain mappings, combined with multi-dimensional SCS outcomes. Back pain surface decreased significantly greater for the ”SCS + PNfS” group (80.2% ± 21.3%) compared to the “SCS only” group (13.2% ± 94.8%) (p = 0.012), highlighting the clinical interest of SCS + PNfS, in cases where SCS fails to address back pain.

scholarly journals A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study of Auricular Point Acupressure to Manage Chronic Low Back Pain in Older Adults: Study Protocol

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chao Hsing Yeh ◽  
Cuicui Li ◽  
Ronald Glick ◽  
Elizabeth A. Schlenk ◽  
Kathryn Albers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Comparison Group ◽  
Randomized Controlled Study ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Auricular Point

Abstract Background: Chronic low back pain (cLBP) is a major health problem and the most common pain condition among those 60 years of age or older in the US. Despite the development of pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions, cLBP outcomes have not improved and disability rates continue to rise. This study aims to test auricular point acupressure (APA) as a non-invasive, nonpharmacological self-management strategy to manage cLBP and to address current shortcomings of cLBP treatment. Methods: For this prospective randomized controlled study, participants will be randomly assigned into three groups: (1) APA (active points related to cLBP), (2) Comparison Group -1 (non-active points, unrelated to cLBP), (3) Comparison Group-2 (enhanced educational control, an educational booklet on cLBP will be given and the treatment used by participants for their cLBP will be recorded). The ecological momentary assessment smartphone app will be used to collect real-time cLBP outcomes and adherence to APA practice. Treatment and nonspecific psychological placebo effects will be measured via questionnaires for all participants. This proposed trial will evaluate the APA sustained effects for cLBP at 12-month follow-up. Monthly phone follow-up will be used to collect study outcomes. Blood will be collected during study visits at baseline, post-APA treatment, and follow-up study visits at 1-, 3-, 6-, 9- and 12-months post-completion of treatment for a total of 7 assessments. Appointments will start between 9 and 11 am to control for circadian variation in cytokine levels. Discussion: This study is expected to provide vital information on the efficacy, sustainability, and underlying mechanism of APA on cLBP necessary for APA to gain acceptance from both healthcare providers and patients, which would provide a strong impetus for including APA as part of cLBP management in clinical and home settings. Trial registration: NCT03589703, Registered on May 22, 2018

Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation for Chronic Back Pain: Therapy Outcome Predictive Factors

Pain Practice ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 522-533
Author(s):  
Eric‐Jan Gorp ◽  
Sam Eldabe ◽  
Konstantin V. Slavin ◽  
Philippe Rigoard ◽  
Stefaan Goossens ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Back Pain ◽  
Peripheral Nerve ◽  
Predictive Factors ◽  
Pain Therapy ◽  
Chronic Back Pain ◽  
Therapy Outcome ◽  
Field Stimulation ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Field Stimulation

Balneotherapy for chronic low back pain: a randomized, controlled study

2011 ◽  
Vol 32 (10) ◽  
pp. 3193-3199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nur Kesiktas ◽  
Sinem Karakas ◽  
Kerem Gun ◽  
Nuran Gun ◽  
Sadiye Murat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Randomized Controlled Study ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Randomized Controlled
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document