A Review of the Factors and Outcomes of Institutional Interdisciplinary Neuromodulation Committees: A Multicenter Experience.

INTRODUCTION: Neuromodulation represents one of the more advanced tools in the armamentarium of pain physicians. To optimize neuromodulation patient selection and management, an institutional interdisciplinary neuromodulation committee was created at each of two academic medical centers (University of California Davis [UCD] and Stanford University). The committee aims to collaboratively optimize neuromodulation candidates, to assess and minimize medical and psychologic risks, and to select the best device given a patient's pain condition. In this study, we present the methods and outcome data of the Neuromodulation Committee at the two institutions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After institutional review board approval, we included all adult patients who were evaluated by the Neuromodulation Committee between 2017 and 2020 at two academic pain clinics. Patients with insufficient data were excluded from the study. A retrospective chart review was completed on 385 UCD and Stanford University patient committee reviews. Data collected from the chart review included demographics (age, sex), committee meeting results (proceed with trial/implant or decline), trial success, and implant rate. RESULTS: Of the 385 patients screened, the committees recommended proceeding with an implantable device (peripheral and neuraxial) in 337 patients (87.5%). Of the 278 patients recommended for neuraxial neuromodulation, 131 underwent trials with percutaneous leads (47.1%). Trials were successful (causing a ≥50% reduction in self-reported pain or improved function) in 108 patients (82.4%). The institutions completed 87 implants of 131 trials, representing a trial-to-permanent ratio of 66.4%. CONCLUSIONS: The Neuromodulation Committee aims to identify optimal patients for neuromodulation, address procedural challenges, decrease adverse events, provide educational context for trainees, and improve patient-related outcomes. Patients who were recommended for neuromodulation and subsequently underwent intervention had high trial success rates for dorsal root ganglion stimulation and spinal cord stimulation. The findings indicate that such an approach can lead to neuromodulation success, especially at academic centers, by combining the expertise of both medical and psychologic professionals.

The current state of training in pain medicine fellowships: An Association of Pain Program Directors (APPD) survey of program directors.

INTRODUCTION: The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) approved the first pain medicine fellowship programs over three decades ago, designed around a pharmacological philosophy. Following that, there has been a rise in the transition of pain medicine education toward a multidisciplinary interventional model based on a tremendous surge of contemporaneous literature in these areas. This trend has created variability in clinical experience and education amongst accredited pain medicine programs with minimal literature evaluating the differences and commonalities in education and experience of different pain medicine fellowships through Program Director (PD) experiences. This study aims to gather insight from pain medicine fellowship program directors across the country to assess clinical and interventional training, providing valuable perspectives on the future of pain medicine education. METHODS: This study involved 56 PDs of ACGME-accredited pain fellowship programs in the United States. The recruitment process included three phases: advanced notification, invitation, and follow-up to maximize response rate. Participants completed a standard online questionnaire, covering various topics such as subcategory fields, online platforms for supplemental education, clinical experience, postgraduate practice success, and training adequacy. RESULTS: Surveys were completed by 39/56 (69%) standing members of the Association of Pain Program Directors (APPD). All PDs allowed fellows to participate in industry-related and professional society-related procedural workshops, with 59% encouraging these workshops. PDs emphasized the importance of integrity, professionalism, and diligence for long-term success. Fifty-four percent of PDs expressed the need for extension of fellowship training to avoid supplemental education by industry or pain/spine societies. CONCLUSION: This study highlights the challenge of providing adequate training in all Pain Medicine subtopics within a 12-month pain medicine fellowship. PDs suggest the need for additional training for fellows and discuss the importance of curriculum standardization.

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for the 21st Century: Sural, Superficial Peroneal, and Tibial Nerves.

OBJECTIVE: Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) of the lower extremity has progressed significantly over the last decade. From the proof of concept that ultrasound-guided, percutaneous implantation was possible to advances in waveforms, the field has been rapidly evolving. While most nerves in the lower extremity can be PNS targets, consideration must be given to the ergonomics of pulse generator placement, patient comfort, and avoidance of lead migration. For this paper, we examine some of the conditions amenable to lower extremity PNS, review the evidence and history behind PNS for these conditions, and describe approaches for the tibial, sural, and superficial peroneal nerves. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed. Search terms used were "peripheral nerve stimulation," "lower extremity entrapment neuropathies," "sural nerve," "superficial peroneal nerve," "tibial nerve," and "tarsal tunnel syndrome." Emphasis was placed on randomized controlled studies, anatomical dissections, and comprehensive review articles. Approaches to nerves and ultrasound images were based on anecdotal PNS cases from an experienced implanter (SP). CONCLUSIONS: The development of ultrasound as a viable method of image guidance for percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation has led to an exponential growth in the field. Lower extremity percutaneous lead placement is both feasible and an appropriate treatment modality for certain pain conditions.

A review of prospective studies regarding percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation treatment in the management of chronic pain.

Conventionally, peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) for treatment of chronic pain has involved a two-stage process: a short-term (e.g., 7 days) trial and, if significant pain relief is achieved, a permanent PNS system is implanted. A percutaneous PNS treatment is now available where a coiled lead may be implanted for up to 60 days with the goal of producing sustained relief. In the present review, published prospective trials using percutaneous PNS treatment were identified and synthesized. The collected evidence indicates that percutaneous PNS treatment for up to 60 days provides durable clinically significant improvements in pain and pain interference. Similar efficacy across diverse targets and etiologies supports the broad applicability for use within the chronic pain population using this nonopioid technology.

What is this review about? This review looks at a drug-free way to treat chronic pain called percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS). Percutaneous means it is placed through the skin. PNS applies small amounts of electricity to the nerves to reduce chronic pain. Most PNS systems involve a two-step process. A short trial is first performed to see if a patient has pain relief. A permanent system is then placed if the person had pain relief. Percutaneous PNS treatments are different. They use a thin wire called a lead placed in the body for up to 60 days. The lead is taken out at the end of the treatment period. Studies have shown that this type of PNS treatment can reduce chronic pain even after the treatment is over. No previous article has collected all these studies of percutaneous PNS in one place.What evidence was gathered? This review found evidence from studies on treatment of chronic pain. Pain types included shoulder pain, neuropathic pain and low back pain. It found that percutaneous PNS treatment for up to 60 days can reduce pain and how pain interferes with daily life.How can these data lead to better care for patients? These findings mean that percutaneous PNS treatments could be a useful, non-drug option for many types of chronic pain.

A Systematic Guideline by the ASPN Workgroup on the Evidence, Education, and Treatment Algorithm for Painful Diabetic Neuropathy: SWEET.

Introduction: Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) is a leading cause of pain and disability globally with a lack of consensus on the appropriate treatment of those suffering from this condition. Recent advancements in both pharmacotherapy and interventional approaches have broadened the treatment options for PDN. There exists a need for a comprehensive guideline for the safe and effective treatment of patients suffering from PDN. Objective: The SWEET Guideline was developed to provide clinicians with the most comprehensive guideline for the safe and appropriate treatment of patients suffering from PDN. Methods: The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified an educational need for a comprehensive clinical guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations for PDN. A multidisciplinary group of international experts developed the SWEET guideline. The world literature in English was searched using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Meeting Abstracts, and Scopus to identify and compile the evidence for diabetic neuropathy pain treatments (per section as listed in the manuscript) for the treatment of pain. Manuscripts from 2000-present were included in the search process. Results: After a comprehensive review and analysis of the available evidence, the ASPN SWEET guideline was able to rate the literature and provide therapy grades for most available treatments for PDN utilizing the United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria. Conclusion: The ASPN SWEET Guideline represents the most comprehensive review of the available treatments for PDN and their appropriate and safe utilization.

Reconceptualizing Acute Pain Management in the 21st Century.

Acute pain can have many etiologies that include surgical procedures, trauma (motor vehicle accident), musculoskeletal injuries (rib fracture) and, burns among others. Valuable components of a multimodal approach to acute pain management include both opioid and non-opioid medications, procedure specific regional anesthesia techniques (peripheral nerve blocks and neuraxial approaches), and interventional approaches (eg, peripheral nerve stimulation and cryo-neurolysis). Overall, successful acute perioperative pain management requires a multimodal, multidisciplinary approach that involves a coordinated effort between the surgical team, the anesthesia team, nursing, and pharmacy staff using Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols.

Pain Education and Knowledge (PEAK) Consensus Guidelines for Neuromodulation: A Proposal for Standardization in Fellowship and Training Programs.

The need to be competent in neuromodulation is and should be a prerequisite prior to completing a fellowship in interventional pain medicine. Unfortunately, many programs lack acceptable candidates for these advanced therapies, and fellows may not receive adequate exposure to neuromodulation procedures. The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) desires to create a consensus of experts to set a minimum standard of competence for neurostimulation procedures, including spinal cord stimulation (SCS), dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S), and peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS). The executive board of ASPN accepted nominations for colleagues with excellence in the subject matter of neuromodulation and physician education. This diverse group used peer-reviewed literature and, based on grading of evidence and expert opinion, developed critical consensus guides for training that all accredited fellowship programs should adopt. For each consensus point, transparency and recusal were used to eliminate bias, and an author was nominated for evidence grading oversight and bias control. Pain Education and Knowledge (PEAK) Consensus Guidelines for Neuromodulation sets a standard for neuromodulation training in pain fellowship training programs. The consensus panel has determined several recommendations to improve care in the United States for patients undergoing neuromodulation. As neuromodulation training in the United States has evolved dramatically, these therapies have become ubiquitous in pain medicine. Unfortunately, fellowship programs and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) pain program requirements have not progressed training to match the demands of modern advancements. PEAK sets a new standard for fellowship training and presents thirteen practice areas vital for physician competence in neuromodulation.