Neuromodulation : journal of the International Neuromodulation Society
-
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is well accepted for the treatment of chronic pain since its beginning in 1967. As its use continues to enter into the chronic pain treatment algorithm earlier, conscience patient selection and durability of the therapy are clearly clinically relevant. To improve treatment efficacy, consensus statements and guidelines were developed. ⋯ The current available guideline statements have clear deficiencies in either scope of coverage, evidence synthesis, or lack of transparency of funding. Improved evidence and best practice/guideline assessment may improve patient outcomes and accessibility to these important modalities. Further prospective comparator randomized data are required to not only provide data of clinical and cost-effectiveness in other indications but also to better describe the position of neurostimulation application within the disease management pathway. Therein cases where there appears to be sufficient evidence and consensus, every effort should be made to secure access to these effective therapies. Importantly, each guideline only has a useful clinical half-life, if not updated. This should be acknowledged by both clinicians and third-party payers. Based on these deficiencies, the International Neuromodulation Society recommended the creation of a consensus conference to examine the appropriate use of neurostimulation for pain and ischemic disease.
-
Low back pain (LBP) is a highly prevalent condition and one of the leading causes of lost productivity and health-care costs. The objective of this review is to discuss the role of interventional pain procedures and evidence of their effectiveness in treatment of chronic LBP. ⋯ Implementation of interventional pain procedures in the treatment framework of LBP has resulted in improvement of pain intensity in at least the short and medium terms, but equivocal results have been observed in functional improvement.
-
Review
A review of economic factors related to the delivery of health care for chronic low back pain.
We describe tools used to evaluate the economic impact of health care interventions, discuss the economic burden of chronic low back pain, and review evidence on the cost-effectiveness of treating failed back surgery syndrome with spinal cord stimulation, intrathecal drug delivery, acupuncture, epidural injections, disc prosthesis, lumbar fusion, and noninvasive therapies. We also mention the lack of cost studies for emerging therapies, such as vibrotherapy and peripheral nerve field stimulation. Topics include types of cost studies; the economic perspectives taken by such studies; direct and indirect costs; measures of success; definitions of cost-effectiveness, incremental cost-effectiveness, incremental cost-utility ratios, and quality-adjusted life years; the concept of maximum willingness to pay; and the use of cost-effectiveness models. ⋯ The fact that chronic low back pain arises from a variety of causes makes choosing appropriate treatment difficult. Determining the cost-effectiveness of various treatments for chronic low back pain depends on well-designed and well-executed randomized controlled trials with parallel economic evaluations. Researchers can use economic models to extrapolate costs and outcomes over the long term.
-
Low back pain affects many individuals. It has profound effects on well-being and is often the cause of significant physical and psychological health impairments. Low back pain also affects work performance and social responsibilities, such as family life, and is increasingly a major factor in escalating health-care costs. A global review of the prevalence of low back pain in the adult general population has shown its point prevalence to be approximately 12%, with a one-month prevalence of 23%, a one-year prevalence of 38%, and a lifetime prevalence of approximately 40%. Furthermore, as the population ages over the coming decades, the number of individuals with low back pain is likely to increase substantially. This comprehensive review is undertaken to assess the increasing prevalence of low back pain and the influence of comorbid factors, along with escalating costs. ⋯ Although it has been alleged that low back pain resolves in approximately 80% to 90% of patients in about six weeks, irrespective of the administration or type of treatment, with only 5% to 10% of patients developing persistent back pain, this concept has been frequently questioned as the condition tends to relapse and most patients experience multiple episodes years after the initial attack.
-
The use of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is well established in the treatment of neuropathic pain. This procedure has been approved in the United States for neuropathic pain of the trunk and limbs from various conditions. International use is variable based on governmental policy. Most studies showing efficacy have focused on pain primarily in the limbs for such conditions as complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), sciatica, radiculitis, ischemic limb pain, and peripheral neuropathy. Data on success in neuropathic pain of the trunk and particularly of the axial back are limited. New understanding about the targets of neuromodulation and their treatment with novel neurostimulation approaches has led to a new dawn of enthusiasm for spinal cord stimulation for axial low back pain. ⋯ Improved technology and a better understanding of the goals of stimulation have led to a new ability to stimulate the axial low back and increase the effectiveness of these therapies to reduce pain. New paddle lead constructs, percutaneous paddle lead introduction, and other new technologies have led to an increased number of potential candidates for spinal cord stimulation. Optimizing the application of neurostimulation for chronic axial back pain will depend upon answering questions relating to patient selection, implantation technique, and stimulation parameters.