Spinal Cord Stimulation for Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: to Trial or Not to Trial?

Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a recommended therapy to treat failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). A trial period is practiced to enhance patient selection. However, its fundamental evidence is limited, especially concerning long-term benefit and therapy safety. We compared the long-term (5.3 ± 4.0 years) clinical outcome and therapy safety of a trialed and nontrialed implantation strategy, including multidimensional variables and pain intensity fluctuations over time. A multicenter cohort analysis was performed in 2 comparable groups of FBSS patients. Regarding eligibility, patients had to be treated with SCS for at least 3 months. While the Trial group comprised patients who underwent an SCS implantation after a successful trial, the No-Trial group encompassed patients who underwent complete implantation within 1 session. The primary outcome measures were pain intensity scores and complications. The Trial and No-Trial groups consisted of 194 and 376 patients (N = 570), respectively. A statistically but not clinically significant difference in pain intensity (P = .003; effect = 0.506 (.172-.839)) was found in favor of the Trial group. No interaction between a time dependency effect and pain intensity was noted. Whereas trialed SCS patients were more likely to cease opioid usage (P = .003; OR = .509 (.326-.792)), patients in the No-Trial group endured fewer infections (P = .006; proportion difference = .43 (.007-.083)). Although the clinical relevance of our findings should be proven in future studies, this long-term real-world data study indicates that patient-centered assessments on whether an SCS trial should be performed have to be investigated. According to the current ambiguous evidence, SCS trials should be considered on a case-by-case basis. PERSPECTIVE: The currently available comparative evidence, together with our results, remains ambiguous on which SCS implantation strategy might be deemed superior. An SCS trial should be considered on a case-by-case basis, for which further investigation of its clinical utility in certain patient populations or character traits is warranted.

Spinal Cord Stimulation With Additional Peripheral Nerve/Field Stimulation Versus Spinal Cord Stimulation Alone on Back Pain and Quality of Life in Patients With Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS) or failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) refers to new or persistent pain following spinal surgery for back or leg pain in a subset of patients. Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is a neuromodulation technique that can be considered in patients with predominant leg pain refractory to conservative treatment. Patients with predominant low back pain benefit less from SCS. Another neuromodulation technique for treatment of chronic low back pain is subcutaneous stimulation or peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS). We investigated the effect of SCS with additional PNFS on pain and quality of life of patients with PSPS compared with that of SCS alone after 12 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a comparative study of patients with PSPS who responded to treatment with either SCS + PNFS or SCS only following a multicenter randomized clinical trial protocol. In total, 75 patients completed the 12-month follow-up: 21 in the SCS-only group and 54 in the SCS + PNFS group. Outcome measures were pain (visual analog scale), quality of life (36-Item Short Form Survey [SF-36]), anxiety and depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [HADS]), overall health (EuroQol Five-Dimension [EQ-5D]), disability (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]), and pain assessed by the McGill questionnaire. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. Both groups showed a significant reduction in back and leg pain at 12 months compared with baseline measurements. No significant differences were found between the groups in effect on both primary (pain) and secondary parameters (SF-36, HADS, EQ-5D, ODI, and McGill pain). CONCLUSION: In a subgroup of patients with chronic back and leg pain, SCS alone provided similar long-term pain relief and quality-of-life improvement as PNFS in addition to SCS. In patients with refractory low back pain not responding to SCS alone, adding PNFS should be recommended. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT01776749.

Subcutaneous Stimulation as Add-on Therapy to Spinal Cord Stimulation in Patients With Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Significantly Increases the Total Electrical Charge per Second: Aspects on Stimulation Parameters and Energy Requirements of the Implanted Neurostimulators.

OBJECTIVE: In our previous multicenter randomized controlled trial, we demonstrated the clinical effectiveness of peripheral nerve field stimulation (PNFS) as add-on therapy to spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for the treatment of chronic back pain in patients with persistent spinal pain syndrome (PSPS) or failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS). To our knowledge, no previous study has investigated the effect of PNFS as an add-on to SCS on the energy consumption of the implanted neurostimulators. Therefore, in this study, we compared the specific stimulation parameters and energy requirements of a previously unreported group of patients with only SCS with those of a group of patients with SCS and add-on PNFS. We also investigated differences that might explain the need for PNFS in the treatment of chronic low back pain. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed 75 patients with complete sets of stimulation parameters, with 21 patients in the SCS-only group and 54 patients in the SCS + PNFS group. Outcome measures were average visual analog scale score, SCS parameters (voltage, frequency, and pulse width), SCS charge per second, and total charge per second. We analyzed baseline characteristics and differences between and within groups over time. RESULTS: Both groups had comparable patient characteristics at baseline and showed a significant decrease in back and leg pain. SCS charge per second did not significantly differ between the groups at baseline or at 12 months. The total charge per second was significantly higher in the active SCS + PNFS group than in the SCS-only group at baseline; in the SCS + PNFS group, this persisted for up to 12 months, and the SCS charge per second and total charge per second increased significantly over time. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show that add-on PNFS increases the total charge per second compared with SCS alone, as expected. However, further research is needed because our results do not directly explain why some patients require add-on PNFS to treat low back pain.

Emerging practices supporting diabetes self-management among food insecure adults and families: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Food insecurity undermines a patient's ability to follow diabetes self-management recommendations. Care providers need strategies to direct their support of diabetes management among food insecure patients and families. OBJECTIVE: To identify what emerging practices health care providers can relay to patients or operationalize to best support diabetes self-management among food insecure adults and families. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Food insecure populations with diabetes (type 1, type 2, prediabetes, gestational diabetes) and provided diabetes management practices specifically for food insecure populations. Only studies in English were considered. In total, 21 articles were reviewed. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: Seven databases: Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Database, PsychInfo, Scopus, and Web of Science. RESULTS: Emerging practices identified through this review include screening for food insecurity as a first step, followed by tailoring nutrition counseling, preventing hypoglycemia through managing medications, referring patients to professional and community resources, building supportive care provider-patient relationships, developing constructive coping strategies, and decreasing tobacco smoking. CONCLUSION: Emerging practices identified in our review include screening for food insecurity, nutrition counselling, tailoring management plans through medication adjustments, referring to local resources, improving care provider-patient relationship, promoting healthy coping strategies, and decreasing tobacco use. These strategies can help care providers better support food insecure populations with diabetes. However, some strategies require further evaluation to enhance understanding of their benefits, particularly in food insecure individuals with gestational and prediabetes, as no studies were identified in these populations. A major limitation of this review is the lack of global representation considering no studies outside of North America satisfied our inclusion criteria, due in part to the English language restriction.

Education, practical training and professional development for public health practitioners: a scoping review of the literature and insights for sustainable food system capacity-building.

OBJECTIVE: Noting the upstream positioning of sustainable food systems (SFS) to multiple global crises, the present review described examples of emerging and promising practices to support SFS-oriented education, practical training (PT) and continuing professional development (CPD) among trainees and public health practitioners (PHP). A secondary objective was to compile the evidence into practical considerations for educators, supervising practitioners and professional associations. DESIGN: A scoping review of the literature published between 2007 and 2017 was conducted in May 2017 using four databases: CINAHL, MEDLINE, Scopus and HSSA, along with bibliography hand-searching and expert consultation. Articles were screened for relevance and specificity by independent raters. RESULTS: Nineteen articles were included for analysis. Two-thirds of the articles related to dietitians and public health nutritionists. Emerging practices included curriculum-based considerations, incorporation of 'sustainability' within professional competencies and self-reflection related to SFS. Descriptions of SFS-related education, PT and CPD practices appeared largely in the literature from developed countries. Articles converged on the need for ecosystems, food systems and sustainability considerations within and across practice to support current and future practitioners. CONCLUSIONS: There is growing interest in SFS but guidance to support educators and preceptors is lacking. Updates to dietary guidelines to reflect issues of sustainability are a timely prompt to examine the education, training and development needs of trainees and PHP. Practical examples of emerging practices can empower PHP to promote SFS in all areas of practice. More research is needed to address identified gaps in the literature and to improve SFS-specific education, PT and CPD.

Effect of local anesthetic volume (15 vs 40 mL) on the duration of ultrasound-guided single shot axillary brachial plexus block: a prospective randomized, observer-blinded trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: One of the advantages of ultrasound-guided peripheral nerve block is that visualization of local anesthetic spread allows for a reduction in dose. However, little is known about the effect of dose reduction on sensory and motor block duration. The purpose of the present study was to compare the duration of sensory and motor axillary brachial plexus block (ABPB) with 15 or 40 mL mepivacaine 1.5%. METHODS: Thirty patients were randomly allocated to receive ultrasound-guided ABPB with either 15 (group 15 mL, n = 15) or 40 mL (group 40 mL, n = 15) mepivacaine 1.5%. Onset, efficacy, and duration of sensory and motor block were compared. RESULTS: Two patients in group 15 mL needed an additional rescue block before surgery and were excluded from subsequent analysis. The overall median duration of sensory and motor block was significantly shorter in group 15 mL (225 [148-265] mins vs 271 [210-401] mins and 217 [144-250] mins vs 269 [210-401] mins, respectively; P < 0.01). Duration of sensory and motor block of individual nerves was significantly shorter in group 15 mL (20%-40% reduction for sensory and 18%-37% for motor block). Time to first request of postoperative analgesia was also significantly reduced in group 15 mL (163 [SD, 39] vs 235 [SD, 59] mins, respectively, P < 0.05). There were no differences in the other block characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: In ABPB with mepivacaine 1.5%, reducing the dose from 40 mL to 15 mL (62.5%) shortens the overall duration of sensory and motor block by approximately 17% to 19%, reduces sensory and motor block duration of individual nerves by 18% to 40%, and decreases the time to first request of postoperative analgesia by approximately 30%.

Value of single-injection or continuous sciatic nerve block in addition to a continuous femoral nerve block in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Continuous femoral nerve block in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) improves and shortens postoperative rehabilitation. The primary aim of this study was to investigate whether the addition of sciatic nerve block to continuous femoral nerve block will shorten the time-to-discharge readiness. METHODS: Ninety patients undergoing TKA were prospectively randomized to 1 of 3 groups: patient-controlled analgesia via femoral nerve catheter alone (F group) or combined with a single-injection (Fs group) or continuous sciatic nerve block (FCS group) until the second postoperative day. Discharge readiness was defined as the ability to walk and climb stairs independently, average pain on a numerical rating scale at rest lower than 4, and no complications. In addition, knee function, pain, supplemental morphine requirement, local anesthetic consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were evaluated. RESULTS: Median time-to-discharge readiness was similar: F group, 4 days (range, 2-16 days); Fs group, 4 days (range, 2-7 days); and FCS group, 4 days (range, 2-9 days; P = 0.631). No significant differences were found regarding knee function, local anesthetic consumption, or postoperative nausea and vomiting. During the day of surgery, pain was moderate to severe in the F group, whereas Fs and FCS groups experienced minimal pain (P < 0.01). Patients in the F group required significantly more supplemental morphine on the day of surgery and the first postoperative day. Until the second postoperative day, pain was significantly less in the FCS group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A single-injection or continuous sciatic nerve block in addition to a femoral nerve block did not influence time-to-discharge readiness. A single-injection sciatic nerve block can reduce severe pain on the day of the surgery, whereas a continuous sciatic nerve block reduces moderate pain during mobilization on the first 2 postoperative days.