AIRR - ANZCA Institutional Research Repository
Skip navigation
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/11055/578
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorCourtney Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorEspinet Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorMitchell Ben_US
dc.contributor.authorRusso Men_US
dc.contributor.authorMuir Aen_US
dc.contributor.authorVerrills Pen_US
dc.contributor.authorDavis Ken_US
dc.date2015-04-16-
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-15T01:16:56Z-
dc.date.available2018-06-15T01:16:56Z-
dc.date.issued2015-07-02-
dc.identifier.citation18(5):361-366en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11055/578-
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: Conventional spinal cord stimulation (SCS) delivers a tonic waveform with consistent stream of pulses; burst delivers groups of pulses separated by short pulse-free periods. The current study compared the short-term safety and efficacy of burst with tonic stimulation in subjects already receiving SCS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: At 4 IRB-approved sites, 22 subjects previously implanted with an SCS device for intractable, chronic pain gave informed consent and received burst stimulation for 14 days. Subjects reported average daily Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for overall, trunk, and limb pain using tonic stimulation and after 7 and 14 days of burst stimulation. Thoughts about pain were assessed using the Pain Catastrophizing Scale. Areas of paresthesia were assessed during tonic and burst stimulation using body maps. Assessment of patient satisfaction and preferred stimulation occurred after 14 days of burst. RESULTS: Average daily overall VAS reduced 46% from a mean of 53.5 (±20.2) mm during tonic SCS to 28.5 (±18.1) mm during burst (p < 0.001); trunk and limb VAS scores were also reduced by 33% and 51%, respectively. During burst, 16 subjects (73%) reported no paresthesia, 5 (23%) reported a reduction, and 1 (4%) reported increased paresthesia. After 14 days, 21 subjects (95%) reported being very satisfied or satisfied with burst. Burst was preferred by 20 subjects (91%), tonic by 1 (5%), and 1 (5%) reported no preference. Better pain relief was the most common reason cited for preference. CONCLUSIONS: A majority of subjects reported improved pain relief using burst compared with tonic stimulation. Most subjects experienced less paresthesia during burst and preferred burst citing better pain relief.en_US
dc.subjectburst stimulationen_US
dc.subjectChronic Painen_US
dc.subjectSpinal Cord Stimulationen_US
dc.subjecttonic stimulationen_US
dc.titleImproved Pain Relief With Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation for Two Weeks in Patients Using Tonic Stimulation: Results From a Small Clinical Study: Improved Pain Relief with Burst SCSen_US
dc.typeJournal Articleen_US
dc.type.contentTexten_US
dc.identifier.journaltitleNeuromodulation: Technology at the Neural Interfaceen_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/ner.12294en_US
dc.description.affiliatesMelbourne Pain Group, Glen Waverly, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesBenowa, Queensland, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesMetro Spine Clinic, Caulfield South, Victoria, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesHunter Pain Clinic, Newcastle, NSW, Australiaen_US
dc.description.affiliatesSt. Jude Medical, Plano, TX, USAen_US
dc.description.pubmedurihttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25879884en_US
dc.type.studyortrialMulticentre Studiesen_US
dc.ispartof.anzcaresearchfoundationYesen_US
local.message.claim2023-05-02T12:05:26.067+1000|||rp00166|||submit_approve|||dc_contributor_author|||None*
dc.type.specialtyAnaesthesiaen_US
item.cerifentitytypePublications-
item.openairecristypehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_18cf-
item.openairetypeJournal Article-
item.grantfulltextreserved-
item.fulltextWith Fulltext-
Appears in Collections:Scholarly and Clinical
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Improved Pain Relief With Burst SCS for Two Weeks in Patients Using Tonic Stimulation (ID 54758).pdf
  Restricted Access
137.52 kBAdobe PDFView/Open    Request a copy
Show simple item record

Page view(s)

58
checked on Sep 18, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.