Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 12 de 12
Filtrar
1.
Neuromodulation ; 26(3): 483-489, 2023 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36526547

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) is an effective neuromodulation therapy for chronic neuropathic and nociceptive pain. Although the total number of PNS implantations has increased over the last decade, no curriculum exists to guide training and learning of this therapy. The goal of the North American Neuromodulation Society (NANS) education committee is to develop a series of competency-based curriculums for neuromodulation therapies. The PNS curriculum is the latest part of such series, following the curriculums for spinal cord stimulation and intrathecal drug delivery system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multidisciplinary task force (anesthesiology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, neurosurgery, preventive medicine and public health, and neurology) was created by the educational committee of NANS to develop a PNS curriculum in accordance with the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) milestones. The curriculum was created based on the best available evidence and expert knowledge (from our task force members) of available PNS systems. The final PNS curriculum was approved by the NANS board. RESULTS: A PNS curriculum was developed by the task force. Milestones included professionalism, practice-based learning, interpersonal communication, medical knowledge, systems-based practice, procedural skills, and patient care. Each milestone was defined into three categories: early learner, advanced learner, and practitioner. CONCLUSIONS: This manuscript provides a PNS training curriculum developed by a multidisciplinary task force of the NANS educational committee in accordance with the milestones described by ACGME for basic learners, advanced learners, and practitioners. This curriculum will help provide a structured training and evaluation process for obtaining proficiency in PNS treatment(s).


Assuntos
Internato e Residência , Humanos , Competência Clínica , Educação de Pós-Graduação em Medicina , Nervos Periféricos , América do Norte
2.
Neuromodulation ; 26(6): 1208-1217, 2023 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35088723

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: Intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDSs) are used for the treatment of pain and spasticity. A wide range of educational criteria exist for these devices. The North American Neuromodulation Society (NANS) Education Committee developed a comprehensive IDDS curriculum to function as a standard for physician graduate education and assessment through training and into practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A multidisciplinary and diverse task force gathered by the NANS Education Committee met in person and virtually over several sessions and developed an IDDS curriculum modeling their previous work on spinal cord stimulation and following the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) Milestones. There were iterative revisions and adaptations to the curriculum, and the final version was approved by the NANS Board of Directors. RESULTS: The curriculum was developed with distinction between implanting physicians and managing physician and physicians who perform both tasks. There is a lateral temporal progression from early learner to practitioner, with advanced learner in the middle. In addition, there is a modular vertical organization that divides the curriculum into the six educational competencies outlined by the ACGME. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive, modular, graduated, and segmented educational curriculum for IDDSs was developed by NANS. We propose the curriculum to be the standard for guidance and assessment of trainees and physicians pursuing training in implanting or managing IDDSs.


Assuntos
Currículo , Educação de Pós-Graduação em Medicina , Humanos , Acreditação , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos , América do Norte
3.
J Foot Ankle Surg ; 62(3): 576-582, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36922315

RESUMO

The primary objective of this study was to assess the negative predictive value of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nasal swabs in MRSA diabetic foot infections. MEDLINE and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to May 1, 2020. The following search string was used: (methicillin-resistant S. aureus OR MRSA) AND (nasal OR nares) AND (diabetic OR foot OR diabetic foot infections). All studies that contained data comparing MRSA nasal swab positivity to wound cultures from diabetic foot infections and met the inclusion criteria were included. Among the 86 relevant studies, 6 studies with 8706 diabetic patients were included. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline extension for Diagnostic Test Accuracy reviews was followed. The primary meta-analysis outcomes were the negative and positive predictive values of MRSA nasal swabs for MRSA diabetic foot infections. The pooled specificity and pooled sensitivity were determined by generating hierarchical summary receiver characteristic operating curves. In the bivariate meta-analysis, involving the 6 studies, pooled sensitivity and specificity was 41.7% (95% confidence interval = 32.9, 51) and 94.1% (95% confidence interval = 89.5, 96.8), respectively. In low-moderate MRSA prevalence levels (<15%), negative predictive value of MRSA nasal swab was >90% and positive predictive value was <55%. This meta-analysis suggests that in patients with diabetic foot infections, the nasal swab MRSA screen has a poor positive predictive value but an excellent negative predictive value in regions of low to moderate prevalence of MRSA diabetic foot infections.


Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus , Pé Diabético , Staphylococcus aureus Resistente à Meticilina , Infecções Estafilocócicas , Humanos , Pé Diabético/diagnóstico , Cavidade Nasal , Infecções Estafilocócicas/diagnóstico , Infecções Estafilocócicas/epidemiologia , Staphylococcus aureus
4.
Neuromodulation ; 23(7): 893-911, 2020 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32809275

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: The evolution of neuromodulation devices in order to enter magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanners has been one of understanding limitations, engineering modifications, and the development of a consensus within the community in which the FDA could safely administer labeling for the devices. In the initial decades of neuromodulation, it has been contraindicated for MRI use with implanted devices. In this review, we take a comprehensive approach to address all the major products currently on the market in order to provide physicians with the ability to determine when an MRI can be performed for each type of device implant. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We have prepared a narrative review of MRI guidelines for currently marketed implanted neuromodulation devices including spinal cord stimulators, intrathecal drug delivery systems, peripheral nerve stimulators, deep brain stimulators, vagal nerve stimulators, and sacral nerve stimulators. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed, MEDLINE/OVID, SCOPUS, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles, as well as manufacturer-provided information. RESULTS: Guidelines and recommendations for each device and their respective guidelines for use in and around MR environments are presented. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first comprehensive guideline with regards to various devices in the market and MRI compatibility from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience.


Assuntos
Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica/instrumentação , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Guias de Prática Clínica como Assunto , Estimulação Encefálica Profunda , Sistemas de Liberação de Medicamentos , Humanos , Injeções Espinhais , Estimulação da Medula Espinal , Estimulação do Nervo Vago
6.
J Pain Res ; 17: 975-979, 2024.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38496342

RESUMO

In this article, we propose a new diagnostic paradigm known as Chronic Abdominal Discomfort Syndrome (CADS). Patient's presentation centers around chronic abdominal pain not explained by acute pathology with or without accompanying dyspepsia, bloating, nausea and vomiting among other symptoms. The pathophysiology is noted to be neurogenic, possibly stemming from visceral sympathetic nerves or abdominal wall afferent nerves. Diagnosis is supported by signs or symptoms traversing clinical, diagnostic and functional criteria. Included is a tool which can assist clinicians in diagnosing patients with CADS per those domains. We hope to facilitate primary care physicians' and gastroenterologists' utilization of our criteria to provide guidance for selecting which patients may benefit from further interventions or evaluation by a pain physician. The pain physician may then offer interventions to provide the patient with relief.

7.
Pain Ther ; 13(5): 1173-1185, 2024 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38977651

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Drawbacks of fixed-output spinal cord stimulation (SCS) screening trials may lead to compromised trial outcomes and poor predictability of long-term success. Evoked compound action potential (ECAP) dose-controlled closed-loop (CL) SCS allows objective confirmation of therapeutic neural activation and pulse-to-pulse stimulation adjustment. We report on the immediate patient-reported and neurophysiologic treatment response post-physiologic CL-SCS and feasibility of early SCS trial responder prediction. METHODS: Patient-reported pain relief, functional improvement, and willingness to proceed to permanent implant were compared between the day of the trial procedure (Day 0) and end of trial (EOT) for 132 participants in the ECAP Study undergoing a trial stimulation period. ECAP-based neurophysiologic measurements from Day 0 and EOT were compared between responder groups. RESULTS: A high positive predictive value (PPV) was achieved with 98.4% (60/61) of patients successful on the Day 0 evaluation also responding at EOT. The false-positive rate (FPR) was 5.6% (1/18). ECAP-based neurophysiologic measures were not different between patients who passed all Day 0 success criteria ("Day 0 successes") and those who did not ("needed longer to evaluate the therapy"). However, at EOT, responders had higher therapeutic usage and dose levels compared to non-responders. CONCLUSIONS: The high PPV and low FPR of the Day 0 evaluation provide confidence in predicting trial outcomes as early as the day of the procedure. Day 0 trials may be beneficial for reducing patient burden and complication rates associated with extended trials. ECAP dose-controlled CL-SCS therapy may provide objective data and rapid-onset pain relief to improve prognostic ability of SCS trials in predicting outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ECAP Study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04319887).

8.
J Pain Res ; 16: 4217-4228, 2023.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38094100

RESUMO

Cannabinoids have recently gained a renewed interest due to their potential applicability to various medical conditions, specifically the management of chronic pain conditions. Unlike many other medications, medical cannabis is not associated with serious adverse events, and no overdose deaths have been reported. However, both safety and efficacy data for medical cannabis treatment of chronic, nonmalignant pain conditions are lacking. Therefore, representatives from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience summarize the evidence, according to level and grade, for medical cannabis treatment of several different pain conditions. Treatment of cancer-related pain has prospective evidentiary support for the use of medical cannabis. Although 3 large and well-designed randomized controlled trials investigated cannabis treatment of cancer-related pain, the evidence yielded only a grade D recommendation. Neuropathic pain has been investigated in prospective studies, but a lack of high-quality evidence renders cannabis treatment for this indication a grade C recommendation. Both safety and efficacy data are lacking for use of medical cannabis to treat chronic nonmalignant pain conditions.

9.
Pain Manag ; 12(7): 795-804, 2022 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35946308

RESUMO

Peripheral nerve stimulation is an established treatment modality for chronic neuropathic pain. Over the last decade, with the advent of innovative devices and delivery platforms, peripheral nerve stimulation has evolved from invasive open surgeries to image-guided, minimally invasive percutaneous procedures. The authors hereby present a novel device, the Nalu™ Neurostimulation System (Nalu Medical, CA, USA), which has established its advantages in providing predictable and reliable peripheral nerve stimulation therapy for chronic neuropathic pain management. This novel device is effective in treating chronic pain conditions such as post-herniorrhaphy pain syndrome, intercostal neuralgia, post-laminectomy syndrome, and complex regional pain syndrome and holds great promise for the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain.


Chronic nerve pain is a debilitating condition that can affect quality of life and functioning. The Nalu™ Neurostimulation System (Nalu Medical, CA, USA) provides long-term pain relief without medications. There are numerous devices currently available that can be utilized to block pain signals using small wires. This system is unique because the wires placed over affected nerves are powered by an external battery that does not require permanent surgical implantation. Pain after hernia surgery, back surgery, hip surgery and knee surgery, as well as nerve pain can be effectively managed by this system.


Assuntos
Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica , Síndrome Pós-Laminectomia , Neuralgia , Estimulação Elétrica Nervosa Transcutânea , Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica/métodos , Síndrome Pós-Laminectomia/terapia , Humanos , Laminectomia/efeitos adversos , Neuralgia/terapia , Nervos Periféricos , Estimulação Elétrica Nervosa Transcutânea/métodos
10.
J Pain Res ; 15: 1305-1314, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35535265

RESUMO

Background: The use of intrathecal drug delivery for chronic and cancer pain medicine has been established for decades. However, optimization and utilization of this technique still lag behind other modalities for pain control. Some of this may be due to variability of surgical technique, medication usage and education. It is currently unclear on whether or not practitioners follow available algorithms for the use of intrathecal drug delivery systems. Methods: A survey developed by the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) was sent to its members via email using the cloud-based SurveyMonkey. After 30 days of being available, 159 different providers responded to the survey that consisted of 31 various multiple choice and free response questions. Each question was not required and the number of responses to each varied from 128 to 159. Results: Approximately 9% of those who successfully received and opened the email containing the survey responded, likely due to a small number of providers working with intrathecal drug delivery systems. Eighty-six of respondents practice medicine in the United States, and 87% of the respondents were attending physicians. A majority of respondents, approximately 74%, were board certified in pain medicine with 69% of respondents being train in anesthesiology. The first and second most used medications for intrathecal pump trial were morphine and fentanyl, respectively. Most respondents, approximately 96%, provide pre-operative/intra-operative antibiotics. The most common first-choice medication for implanted intrathecal pumps was also morphine with the most common implanted location being the abdomen. Conclusion: Interestingly, there is currently fairly substantial variation in the way providers utilize intrathecal pump delivery for both chronic and cancer pain. There is variation from the training background of the providers providing care, to the pre-implantation trial medications, to where the pump is implanted for each patient, to if the patient has the option to give themselves boluses once implanted. Further research is needed to elucidate current and best practices for intrathecal drug delivery system trials, implantations, and utilization.

11.
J Pain Res ; 15: 3729-3832, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36510616

RESUMO

Introduction: Painful lumbar spinal disorders represent a leading cause of disability in the US and worldwide. Interventional treatments for lumbar disorders are an effective treatment for the pain and disability from low back pain. Although many established and emerging interventional procedures are currently available, there exists a need for a defined guideline for their appropriateness, effectiveness, and safety. Objective: The ASPN Back Guideline was developed to provide clinicians the most comprehensive review of interventional treatments for lower back disorders. Clinicians should utilize the ASPN Back Guideline to evaluate the quality of the literature, safety, and efficacy of interventional treatments for lower back disorders. Methods: The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified an educational need for a comprehensive clinical guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations. Experts from the fields of Anesthesiology, Physiatry, Neurology, Neurosurgery, Radiology, and Pain Psychology developed the ASPN Back Guideline. The world literature in English was searched using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Scopus, and meeting abstracts to identify and compile the evidence (per section) for back-related pain. Search words were selected based upon the section represented. Identified peer-reviewed literature was critiqued using United States Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria and consensus points are presented. Results: After a comprehensive review and analysis of the available evidence, the ASPN Back Guideline group was able to rate the literature and provide therapy grades to each of the most commonly available interventional treatments for low back pain. Conclusion: The ASPN Back Guideline represents the first comprehensive analysis and grading of the existing and emerging interventional treatments available for low back pain. This will be a living document which will be periodically updated to the current standard of care based on the available evidence within peer-reviewed literature.

12.
Bioelectron Med ; 6: 9, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32346553

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Peripheral Nerve Stimulation has been used to treat human disease including pain for several decades. Innovation has made it a more viable option for treatment of common chronic pain processes, and interest in the therapy is increasing. MAIN BODY: While clinical data is forthcoming, understanding factors that influence successful outcomes in the use of PNS still needs to be delineated. This article reviews the evolution and bioelectronic principles of peripheral nerve stimulation including patient selection, nerve targets, techniques and guidance of target delivery. We collate the current evidence for outcomes and provide recommendations for salient topics in PNS. CONCLUSION: Peripheral nerve stimulation has evolved from a surgically invasive procedure to a minimally invasive technique that can be used early in the treatment of peripheral nerve pain. This review identifies and addresses many of the variables which influence the success of PNS in the clinical setting.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA