• Skip to main content
  • Skip to header right navigation
  • Skip to site footer
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Billing Portal
SPRINT® PNS System

SPR Therapeutics

SPRINT PNS System

  • Product
  • For Physicians
    • Clinical Outcomes & References
    • Implant Procedure Videos
    • Video Resources
    • SPRcare Reimbursement
    • Important Safety Information
    • MRI Safety Information
    • Promotional Marketing Toolkit
  • For Patients
    • Patient Stories
    • Patient Resources
    • Recursos para pacientes
    • MicroLead™ Safety
    • MRI Safety Information
  • Clinical Trials
  • News & Events
    • News
    • Events
    • Press Room
  • Careers

Patients Prefer Temporary PNS Treatment for Chronic Back Pain Over RFA and More Invasive Neurostimulation Options Survey Finds

August 13, 2021

Advances in neurostimulation with improved outcomes and reduced invasiveness have challenged the traditional algorithms for pain management. Traditional pain management algorithms previously favored nerve blocks followed by radiofrequency ablation (RFA) prior to considering neurostimulation implants as an option.

Recent innovations provided by temporary percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) treatment have led interventional pain specialists to ask, “What type of pain treatment do back pain patients prefer when they are appropriately informed of the risks and benefits?”

A team of leading interventional pain management specialists, a medical ethicist, and researchers from SPR Therapeutics, Inc., recently launched a project to answer this question. The project involved two surveys. The first survey (n=129) focused on patient preferences involving temporary treatments versus permanent implants while the second survey (n=347) focused on understanding the specific preferences regarding the two most highly preferred treatments from survey 1: Temporary PNS versus RFA.  Conservative treatments such as blocks or injections were not considered as they are typically exhausted before considering more advanced or invasive treatments.

 “This is the first known survey of its kind,” Dr. Amit Gulati, lead researcher and President of World Academy of Pain Medicine United said. “We sought to characterize patient preferences from among the various interventional pain management options available today to better understand how patients receive these potential treatment options when they are well-informed about the pros and cons of each.”

From the survey results, Gulati, et al., concluded patients prefer temporary PNS as a first-choice interventional treatment for low back pain. The results also highlighted key areas in which physicians can better assist patients in the treatment-selection decision making process especially regarding clearly calling out the potential for adverse events such as multifidus denervation associated with RFA and the potential for fracture of the temporary PNS lead.

Temporary PNS Preferred Over RFA and Permanently Implanted PNS, SCS and DRG

The first survey revealed an overall preference for temporary percutaneous PNS among all respondents.See Graphic 1 below.


Graphic 1

Graphic 1 shows that most respondents ranked either RFA or temporary PNS as their first-choice option. Mean ranks (see Graphic 2 below) were also calculated by awarding scores (e.g., 4 points for first choice, 3 points for second choice, etc.) to consider the overall preferences of patients across the full range of options. Temporary PNS had, on average, the highest mean rank score, meaning it was overall the most preferred treatment option by patients.  Surveyed patients next choice was RFA, while permanently implanted SCS (spinal cord stimulator) or DRG (dorsal root ganglion) systems were least preferred overall.

Graphic 2

Based on the mean rank scores by treatment option, Survey 1 revealed the following insights about patient preference for temporary PNS:

  1. Overall, patients prefer PNS more than RFA and permanently implanted SCS/DRG/PNS.
  2. Temporary PNS ranks as a top choice for patients suffering from chronic pain.

Low Back Pain Patients Surveyed Preferred Temporary PNS Over RFA

Graphic 3

Patients that initially chose temporary PNS or RFA as their top choice were then presented with additional information about the risks of temporary PNS (i.e., the potential for lead fracture) and RFA (i.e., the potential for denervation of multifidus muscle). Afterwards, they were asked to select a final preferred treatment option. The “final choice” treatment in Graphic 3 above reflects the preferences of patients after considering the risks of the temporary PNS and RFA procedures.  Low back pain patients surveyed indicated that temporary PNS was the most desired treatment option for treating back pain. RFA was the second most desired option, and a small percentage of patients changed their preference to permanently implanted SCS/DRG/PNS after receiving additional information about risks of temporary PNS and RFA.  (See Graphic 3).

Temporary PNS is Most Desired Low Back Pain Treatment Method Among Survey Respondents

Survey 2 provided further insights into the overall treatment preferences of a second set of low back pain patients by offering survey respondents the following options: stimulation, ablation or neither. The surveyed patients were provided with a description of each treatment option, as reviewed and co-drafted by a medical ethicist, to explain pros and cons of each treatment as accurately as possible. Like Survey 1, patients were provided with additional information about the risks of each treatment option and then asked to select a final preferred treatment option.

In Graphic 4 below, Survey 2 respondents indicated that stimulation was most desired over ablation, where “stimulation” equates to the SPRINT PNS System and 60-day PNS procedure, while “ablation” refers specifically to radiofrequency ablation. Among those that preferred an intervention (i.e., excluding those that selected “Neither”), 62 percent of respondents preferred 60-Day PNS while only 38 percent preferred radiofrequency ablation.

These data further confirm Survey 1 results indicating that patients who are informed about the potential benefits and risks of temporary PNS and RFA tend to prefer temporary PNS over RFA for treating back pain.

Graphic 4

Patient Preference Findings Highlight Opportunities for Physicians to Better Help Patients in Making Informed Decisions

“The above findings in this research lend key insights into the value of temporary PNS and peripheral nerve stimulation overall, but they also spotlight where physicians can better assist their patients,” co-author Mark Stultz, PT, said. “New interventional pain management treatment options have resulted in improved outcomes and reduced invasiveness, but they’ve also brought the challenge of characterizing these options in a way that fosters optimal patient understanding and participation in treatment selection.”

In addition to insights about patient preferences, these surveys revealed important lessons about ethically communicating treatment options, potential benefits, and risks to patients to help inform their choices.

The following are key takeaways for patient-centered physicians to consider when working with chronic pain patients:

  • Verbal descriptors are important when seeking to help patients evaluate their treatment options
  • Ensure treatment descriptors are accurate, clear and don’t accidentally mislead patients
  • Present patients with a clear understanding of each treatment’s potential for efficacy as well as adverse events

In the end, it’s clear from the above results that a patient’s preference and understanding of available treatment options are important considerations when determining a pain management treatment plan.

Further Reading: Temporary PNS Multi-Center Study Demonstrates Sustained Relief in Low Back Pain Patients

The above results, which indicated a preference for temporary PNS over RFA and permanently implanted PNS, SCS or DRG, are not surprising to see given the results of another recent study reviewing temporary PNS in a multi-center trial in patients with low back pain. 

Recently published by PAIN Practice (July 2021), read “Treatment of Chronic Axial Back Pain with 60-day Percutaneous Medial Branch PNS: Primary Endpoint Results from a Prospective Multicenter Study,” for further insights into the clinical evidence for temporary PNS.

Share this post:

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on SMS Share on Email
Category: NewsTag: 60-day percutaneous PNS, Back Pain, Chronic Pain, pain physician, pain relief, permanent PNS implant, PNS, RFA, SPRINT PNS, SPRINT PNS System, temporary pns
Previous Post:Real World Evidence of Sustained Improvements Following Percutaneous PNS: A Retrospective Cross-Sectional Follow-Up Survey
Next Post:Must-See TVPatient show SPRINT PNS device to WKRC Local 12

Reader Interactions

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sidebar

Archives

Recent News

Dr. Samir Sheth discusses how the SPRINT® PNS System has impacted his approach to treating patients with chronic head and neck pain

SPR Therapeutics Debuts Occipital Nerve Stimulation Data at ASRA 2022

A Discussion on Pain Management Options for Patients with Breast Cancer with Dr. Amitabh Gulati

Real-World Retrospective Review of Axial Neck Pain Relief Following Peripheral Nerve Stimulation of Cervical Medial Branch Nerves

Pain Medicine News Features SPRINT® PNS System Real-World Survey Outcomes

Tags

60-day percutaneous PNS acute pain Back Pain back pain treatment cancer pain chronic back pain Chronic Pain clinical study Dr. Mehul Desai drug-free EY award hip pain low back pain medial branch Neuromodulation Non-opioid oncological pain opioid alternative Pain pain appointment pain physician pain relief pain treatment Patients Patient Story peripheral nerve stimulation permanent PNS implant phantom limb pain PNS PNS training post-amputation pain Press release radiofrequency ablation recondition CNS reduced opioids research Research study residual limb pain RFA Shoulder Pain SPRINT PNS SPRINT PNS System temporary pns Training lab webinar
SPRINT® PNS System

22901 Millcreek Blvd, Suite 500
Cleveland, OH 44122
(844) 378-9108 Phone
(216) 803-0777 Fax

Top Work Places 2022

Quick Links

  • Product
  • For Physicians
  • For Patients
  • Clinical Trials
  • News & Events
  • Careers
  • About Us
  • Contact Us

Legal Links

  • Privacy Statement
  • Terms of Use
  • CPRA Requests
  • Important Safety Information
  • Compliance
  • FCOI Policy
  • Product Terms & Conditions
  • Patent Information

Recent News Headlines

Dr. Samir Sheth discusses how the SPRINT® PNS System has impacted his approach to treating patients with chronic head and neck pain

NANS 26th Annual Meeting – Las Vegas, NV

Sprint Regional Lab – Jacksonville

Sprint Regional Lab – Chicago

The SPRINT PNS System is indicated for up to 60 days for: (i) Symptomatic relief of chronic, intractable pain, post-surgical and post-traumatic acute pain; (ii) Symptomatic relief of post-traumatic pain; and (iii) Symptomatic relief of post-operative pain. The SPRINT PNS System is not intended to treat pain in the region innervated by the cranial and facial nerves. Physicians should use their best judgment when deciding when to use the SPRINT PNS System. For more information see the SPRINT PNS System IFU. Most common adverse events are skin irritation and erythema. Results may vary. Rx only.

View References for support of all claims.

The SPRINT® PNS System, MicroLead™, OnePass Introducer™, Rethink Your Pain Strategy™, Outsmart Pain™, Sustained Pain Relief Starts Here™, Life. Get Back to It.™ and SPR® are registered or common law trademarks of SPR Therapeutics, Inc.


Copyright © 2023 SPR Therapeutics. All Rights Reserved.

This website is intended only for US and Canadian residents 18 years of age and older. By clicking “Accept”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies.
Cookie settingsACCEPT
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these cookies, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may have an effect on your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
Save & Accept
Powered by CookieYes Logo