search
Back to results

Comparison of 1000 Hertz (Hz), Burst, and Standard Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Pain Relief

Primary Purpose

Chronic Pain

Status
Unknown status
Phase
Phase 2
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Spinal cord stimulator
Sponsored by
The Center for Clinical Research, Winston-Salem, NC
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional diagnostic trial for Chronic Pain

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - 75 Years (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesAccepts Healthy Volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Subject must be 18 years and older, and younger than 75 years of age.
  • Subject has had a Precision Spectra, or Plus spinal cord stimulator system implanted for chronic painful condition.
  • Subject continues to receive adequate pain relief with greater than or equal to 50% pain relief based on pre-trial and pre-implant pain assessment.
  • Device age should not be less than 2 months old.
  • Subject is willing to comply with all requirements of the study.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Subjects who are getting <50% pain relief on current SCS based on pre-trial and pre-implant pain assessment.
  • Currently diagnosed with cognitive impairment, or exhibits any characteristic, that would limit study candidate's ability to assess pain
  • Unstable medical or psychiatric illness
  • Urine drug screen shows controlled substance/s not prescribed by the prescribers.
  • Lifetime history of psychosis, hypomania, or mania.
  • Epilepsy, or dementia
  • Substance abuse in the last 6 months
  • Pregnant or breastfeeding
  • Not on contraception for those of childbearing age. (Barrier methods, oral contraception, hormone injections, or surgical sterilization)
  • Treatment with investigational drug within 30 days of screening.

Sites / Locations

  • Jason Hong

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Active Comparator

Active Comparator

Arm Label

Treatment group A

Treatment group B

Arm Description

Group A will consist of sequence of treatment with 3 stimulation modes. They are, in order, 1000 hertz, standard, and burst stimulation. Each stimulation modes will last 3 weeks, with 4 days of wash off between them. Each group treatments will take about 3 months, and subject will cross over into the other treatment group. Burst stimulation sends packets of electrical pulses, composed of pulse and packet frequency. 1000 hertz stimulation delivers tonic, sub perception stimulation. The standard stimulation mode, which will serve as the control, will be below 100 hertz, and its pulse strength will be above threshold, where patients will feel the tingling from the electrical pulses generated by the spinal cord stimulator.

Group B will consist of sequence of treatment with 3 stimulation modes. They are, in order, burst stimulation, standard, and 1000 hertz. Each stimulation modes will last 3 weeks, with 4 days of wash off between them. Each group treatments will take about 3 months, and subject will cross over into the other treatment group. Burst stimulation sends packets of electrical pulses, composed of pulse and packet frequency. 1000 hertz stimulation delivers tonic, sub perception stimulation. The standard stimulation mode, which will serve as the control, will be below 100 hertz, and its pulse strength will be above threshold, where patients will feel the tingling from the electrical pulses generated by the spinal cord stimulator.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

NPRS
Pain rating on 10 point digital scale for average, best, worst, during last week, and current pain level to be collected at each follow up visits. Collected data for each stimulation modes will be compared against each other to assess efficacy of 1000 hertz, and burst stimulation against each other and against the standard stimulation to look for differences in pain rating among three stimulation modes. Data comparison will occur at the end of the study, which is expected to last about 6 months.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Oswestry Disability Index
Set of questionnaires designed to assess the level of disability in chronic pain patients. Each patients will be assessed with this questionnaires at each follow up visits. Collected data for each stimulation modes will be compared against each other to assess effects of 1000 hertz, and burst stimulation against each other and against the standard stimulation on Oswestry Disability Index, and changes if any.
Patients Global Impression of Change
Patient's assessment of the improvement or worsening of their painful condition during the study, and these will be collected at each follow up visits. Collected data for each stimulation modes will be compared against each other to assess effects of 1000 hertz, and burst stimulation against each other and against the standard stimulation on PGIC scores, and changes if any.
Preferability Survey
subject preference of one stimulation program out of 3 received

Full Information

First Posted
August 31, 2016
Last Updated
January 29, 2019
Sponsor
The Center for Clinical Research, Winston-Salem, NC
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT02902796
Brief Title
Comparison of 1000 Hertz (Hz), Burst, and Standard Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Pain Relief
Official Title
Randomized Controlled Cross Over Study to Compare the Efficacy of 1000 Hertz (Hz), Burst, and Standard Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Axial Pain Relief
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
January 2018
Overall Recruitment Status
Unknown status
Study Start Date
September 2016 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
September 2019 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
December 2019 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
The Center for Clinical Research, Winston-Salem, NC

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
A randomized controlled with cross over study compares efficacy of burst stimulation, 1000 hertz stimulation, and standard stimulation in an non-superiority trial. The study duration is approximately 24 weeks and each stimulation modes will last for approximately 3 weeks with approximately 4 days of wash off in between.
Detailed Description
Study will enroll 22 patients for the purpose of evaluation of efficacy of burst stimulation, 1000 hertz frequency stimulation or standard stimulation in patients who have a spinal cord stimulators implanted. Each patients will be randomized to either group A or B, where each groups consists of Burst, standard, and 1000 hertz frequency stimulation or vice versa with wash off period in between. The duration for each stimulation modes will be approximately 3 weeks, with approximately 4 days of wash off prior to starting the new stimulation mode and in between stimulation modes. Treatment duration for each groups will last about 3 months or less, and with cross over total duration of the study is about 6 months in total. During the trial there will be 13 visits. The first visit will consist of screening visit activities and once the eligibility of the subjects are confirmed, they will be randomized and they can start the study immediately and begin their wash off period. After the initial visit/ randomization visit, there will be 12 follow up visits. At each visit, patients will be assessed for their pain, disability index, and their perception of their painful condition, as well as any adverse events and changes of medication usage or lack there of. At the end of the study, the data will be pooled to look at the pain level, disability index, and patients perceived changes in their painful condition for each treatment groups (Burst stimulation, 1000 hertz stimulation and standard stimulation) to determine if subject experienced equivocal pain relief from all three stimulation modes.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Chronic Pain

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Diagnostic
Study Phase
Phase 2, Phase 3
Interventional Study Model
Crossover Assignment
Masking
Participant
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
20 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Treatment group A
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Group A will consist of sequence of treatment with 3 stimulation modes. They are, in order, 1000 hertz, standard, and burst stimulation. Each stimulation modes will last 3 weeks, with 4 days of wash off between them. Each group treatments will take about 3 months, and subject will cross over into the other treatment group. Burst stimulation sends packets of electrical pulses, composed of pulse and packet frequency. 1000 hertz stimulation delivers tonic, sub perception stimulation. The standard stimulation mode, which will serve as the control, will be below 100 hertz, and its pulse strength will be above threshold, where patients will feel the tingling from the electrical pulses generated by the spinal cord stimulator.
Arm Title
Treatment group B
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Group B will consist of sequence of treatment with 3 stimulation modes. They are, in order, burst stimulation, standard, and 1000 hertz. Each stimulation modes will last 3 weeks, with 4 days of wash off between them. Each group treatments will take about 3 months, and subject will cross over into the other treatment group. Burst stimulation sends packets of electrical pulses, composed of pulse and packet frequency. 1000 hertz stimulation delivers tonic, sub perception stimulation. The standard stimulation mode, which will serve as the control, will be below 100 hertz, and its pulse strength will be above threshold, where patients will feel the tingling from the electrical pulses generated by the spinal cord stimulator.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Spinal cord stimulator
Intervention Description
Spinal cord stimulator will be programmed to deliver, according to the randomization status of the patient, burst, 1000 hertz, and standard stimulation during each treatment group.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
NPRS
Description
Pain rating on 10 point digital scale for average, best, worst, during last week, and current pain level to be collected at each follow up visits. Collected data for each stimulation modes will be compared against each other to assess efficacy of 1000 hertz, and burst stimulation against each other and against the standard stimulation to look for differences in pain rating among three stimulation modes. Data comparison will occur at the end of the study, which is expected to last about 6 months.
Time Frame
3 weeks, and 4 days
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Oswestry Disability Index
Description
Set of questionnaires designed to assess the level of disability in chronic pain patients. Each patients will be assessed with this questionnaires at each follow up visits. Collected data for each stimulation modes will be compared against each other to assess effects of 1000 hertz, and burst stimulation against each other and against the standard stimulation on Oswestry Disability Index, and changes if any.
Time Frame
3 weeks, and 4 days
Title
Patients Global Impression of Change
Description
Patient's assessment of the improvement or worsening of their painful condition during the study, and these will be collected at each follow up visits. Collected data for each stimulation modes will be compared against each other to assess effects of 1000 hertz, and burst stimulation against each other and against the standard stimulation on PGIC scores, and changes if any.
Time Frame
3 weeks, and 4 days
Title
Preferability Survey
Description
subject preference of one stimulation program out of 3 received
Time Frame
3, and 6 months; at the completion of each treatment groups.

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
75 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Subject must be 18 years and older, and younger than 75 years of age. Subject has had a Precision Spectra, or Plus spinal cord stimulator system implanted for chronic painful condition. Subject continues to receive adequate pain relief with greater than or equal to 50% pain relief based on pre-trial and pre-implant pain assessment. Device age should not be less than 2 months old. Subject is willing to comply with all requirements of the study. Exclusion Criteria: Subjects who are getting <50% pain relief on current SCS based on pre-trial and pre-implant pain assessment. Currently diagnosed with cognitive impairment, or exhibits any characteristic, that would limit study candidate's ability to assess pain Unstable medical or psychiatric illness Urine drug screen shows controlled substance/s not prescribed by the prescribers. Lifetime history of psychosis, hypomania, or mania. Epilepsy, or dementia Substance abuse in the last 6 months Pregnant or breastfeeding Not on contraception for those of childbearing age. (Barrier methods, oral contraception, hormone injections, or surgical sterilization) Treatment with investigational drug within 30 days of screening.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
James North, MD
Organizational Affiliation
The Center for Clinical Research
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Jason Hong
City
Winston-Salem
State/Province
North Carolina
ZIP/Postal Code
27103
Country
United States

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
IPD Sharing Plan Description
No individual data will be shared. Only the pooled data will be shared with public and at the scientific meetings.
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
9156011
Citation
Simpson BA. Spinal cord stimulation. Br J Neurosurg. 1997 Feb;11(1):5-11. doi: 10.1080/02688699746627. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20404705
Citation
De Ridder D, Vanneste S, Plazier M, van der Loo E, Menovsky T. Burst spinal cord stimulation: toward paresthesia-free pain suppression. Neurosurgery. 2010 May;66(5):986-90. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000368153.44883.B3.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23321375
Citation
De Ridder D, Plazier M, Kamerling N, Menovsky T, Vanneste S. Burst spinal cord stimulation for limb and back pain. World Neurosurg. 2013 Nov;80(5):642-649.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2013.01.040. Epub 2013 Jan 12.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24945621
Citation
Schu S, Slotty PJ, Bara G, von Knop M, Edgar D, Vesper J. A prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to examine the effectiveness of burst spinal cord stimulation patterns for the treatment of failed back surgery syndrome. Neuromodulation. 2014 Jul;17(5):443-50. doi: 10.1111/ner.12197. Epub 2014 Jun 19.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25334057
Citation
De Ridder D, Vancamp T, Lenders MW, De Vos CC, Vanneste S. Is preoperative pain duration important in spinal cord stimulation? A comparison between tonic and burst stimulation. Neuromodulation. 2015 Jan;18(1):13-7; discussion 17. doi: 10.1111/ner.12253. Epub 2014 Oct 21.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25858033
Citation
Kriek N, Groeneweg G, Huygen FJ. Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation in a Patient with Complex Regional Pain Syndrome: A 2-year Follow-Up. Pain Pract. 2015 Jul;15(6):E59-64. doi: 10.1111/papr.12295. Epub 2015 Apr 10.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25145400
Citation
Crosby ND, Goodman Keiser MD, Smith JR, Zeeman ME, Winkelstein BA. Stimulation parameters define the effectiveness of burst spinal cord stimulation in a rat model of neuropathic pain. Neuromodulation. 2015 Jan;18(1):1-8; discussion 8. doi: 10.1111/ner.12221. Epub 2014 Aug 21.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25339436
Citation
Van Havenbergh T, Vancamp T, Van Looy P, Vanneste S, De Ridder D. Spinal cord stimulation for the treatment of chronic back pain patients: 500-Hz vs. 1000-Hz burst stimulation. Neuromodulation. 2015 Jan;18(1):9-12; discussion 12. doi: 10.1111/ner.12252. Epub 2014 Oct 22.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24655043
Citation
de Vos CC, Bom MJ, Vanneste S, Lenders MW, de Ridder D. Burst spinal cord stimulation evaluated in patients with failed back surgery syndrome and painful diabetic neuropathy. Neuromodulation. 2014 Feb;17(2):152-9. doi: 10.1111/ner.12116. Epub 2013 Sep 24.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24977394
Citation
De Ridder D, Lenders MW, De Vos CC, Dijkstra-Scholten C, Wolters R, Vancamp T, Van Looy P, Van Havenbergh T, Vanneste S. A 2-center comparative study on tonic versus burst spinal cord stimulation: amount of responders and amount of pain suppression. Clin J Pain. 2015 May;31(5):433-7. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0000000000000129.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26303326
Citation
Kriek N, Groeneweg JG, Stronks DL, Huygen FJ. Comparison of tonic spinal cord stimulation, high-frequency and burst stimulation in patients with complex regional pain syndrome: a double-blind, randomised placebo controlled trial. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2015 Aug 25;16:222. doi: 10.1186/s12891-015-0650-y.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23011119
Citation
Ito S, Sugiura T, Azami T, Sasano H, Sobue K. Spinal cord stimulation for a woman with complex regional pain syndrome who wished to get pregnant. J Anesth. 2013 Feb;27(1):124-7. doi: 10.1007/s00540-012-1462-y. Epub 2012 Aug 15.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21217892
Citation
Yoo HS, Nahm FS, Yim KH, Moon JY, Kim YS, Lee PB. Pregnancy in woman with spinal cord stimulator for complex regional pain syndrome: a case report and review of the literature. Korean J Pain. 2010 Dec;23(4):266-9. doi: 10.3344/kjp.2010.23.4.266. Epub 2010 Dec 1.
Results Reference
background

Learn more about this trial

Comparison of 1000 Hertz (Hz), Burst, and Standard Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Pain Relief

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs