Re: Neurostimulation Dr. in Ohio for PN patients
Posted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:00 pm
Maybe should have posted this as a separate topic Matt, but it is relevant to neuro stimulation .
It's the updated NICE guidelines to neurostimultion and is based on up to date systematic reviews and gives results and conclusions. I haven't read thru' the whole thing . . . . .yet??
The Title is
Systematic Reviews referred by the NICE Interventional Procedures
Programme on behalf of the NICE Interventional Procedures Advisory
Committee (IPAC)
http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/1 ... /62255.pdf
Perhaps this is the most relevant part.
2.3 Efficacy
2.3.1 A case series of 18 patients reported that all patients had greater than 50% reduction in pain (measured by visual analogue scale [VAS]; 0–10 from best to worse) at 12 months, from a baseline pain score of 7.4.
2.3.2 A case series of 13 patients reported a reduction in pain (measured by VAS; 0–10 from best to worse) from a mean score of 7.4 (standard deviation [SD] 1.2) before PNFS to a mean score of 3.9 (SD 1.7) at a mean follow-up of 7 months (p<0.05). Pain relief was rated by the patients as excellent (improvement of 75% or more) in 15% (2/13) of patients, good (improvement 50–74%) in 38% (5/13), fair (improvement 25–49%) in 38% (5/13), and poor (improvement less than 24%) in 8% (1/13) of patients.
2.3.3 The case series of 18 patients reported that 89% (16/18) of patients had reduced or stopped opioid analgesic use at 12-month follow-up. The case series of 13 patients reported that 54% (7/13) of patients reported a reduction in analgesic use (exact timing of reporting unclear).
2.3.4 The case series of 13 patients reported that 69% (9/13) of patients were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’ with treatment (exact timing of reporting unclear).
2.3.5 The Specialist Advisers listed key efficacy outcomes as pain reduction measured on a visual analogue scale; improvement in function as measured by the Oswestry Disability Index; improvement in quality of life as measured on the EQ-5D; reduction in concomitant medication for pain relief including neuropathic agents, opioids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; and early mobilisation and rehabilitation.
Thought some of these comments were interesting
http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/1 ... /63311.pdf
Need to add that this is for back pain BUT back pain includes pelvic pain as the area is to the gluteal crease.
It's the updated NICE guidelines to neurostimultion and is based on up to date systematic reviews and gives results and conclusions. I haven't read thru' the whole thing . . . . .yet??
The Title is
Systematic Reviews referred by the NICE Interventional Procedures
Programme on behalf of the NICE Interventional Procedures Advisory
Committee (IPAC)
http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/1 ... /62255.pdf
Perhaps this is the most relevant part.
2.3 Efficacy
2.3.1 A case series of 18 patients reported that all patients had greater than 50% reduction in pain (measured by visual analogue scale [VAS]; 0–10 from best to worse) at 12 months, from a baseline pain score of 7.4.
2.3.2 A case series of 13 patients reported a reduction in pain (measured by VAS; 0–10 from best to worse) from a mean score of 7.4 (standard deviation [SD] 1.2) before PNFS to a mean score of 3.9 (SD 1.7) at a mean follow-up of 7 months (p<0.05). Pain relief was rated by the patients as excellent (improvement of 75% or more) in 15% (2/13) of patients, good (improvement 50–74%) in 38% (5/13), fair (improvement 25–49%) in 38% (5/13), and poor (improvement less than 24%) in 8% (1/13) of patients.
2.3.3 The case series of 18 patients reported that 89% (16/18) of patients had reduced or stopped opioid analgesic use at 12-month follow-up. The case series of 13 patients reported that 54% (7/13) of patients reported a reduction in analgesic use (exact timing of reporting unclear).
2.3.4 The case series of 13 patients reported that 69% (9/13) of patients were ‘satisfied’ or ‘very satisfied’ with treatment (exact timing of reporting unclear).
2.3.5 The Specialist Advisers listed key efficacy outcomes as pain reduction measured on a visual analogue scale; improvement in function as measured by the Oswestry Disability Index; improvement in quality of life as measured on the EQ-5D; reduction in concomitant medication for pain relief including neuropathic agents, opioids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; and early mobilisation and rehabilitation.
Thought some of these comments were interesting
http://www.nice.org.uk/nicemedia/live/1 ... /63311.pdf
Need to add that this is for back pain BUT back pain includes pelvic pain as the area is to the gluteal crease.