Citations

AbstractObjectiveTo conduct a systematic literature review of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) for pain.DesignGrade the evidence for SCS.MethodsAn international, interdisciplinary work group conducted literature searches, reviewed abstracts, and selected studies for grading. Inclusion/exclusion criteria included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with intractable pain of greater than one year’s duration. Full studies were graded by two independent reviewers. Excluded studies were retrospective, had small numbers of subjects, or existed only as abstracts. Studies were graded using the modified Interventional Pain Management Techniques–Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment, the Cochrane Collaborations Risk of Bias assessment, and the US Preventative Services Task Force level-of-evidence criteria.ResultsSCS has Level 1 evidence (strong) for axial back/lumbar radiculopathy or neuralgia (five high-quality RCTs) and complex regional pain syndrome (one high-quality RCT).ConclusionsHigh-level evidence supports SCS for treating chronic pain and complex regional pain syndrome. For patients with failed back surgery syndrome, SCS was more effective than reoperation or medical management. New stimulation waveforms and frequencies may provide a greater likelihood of pain relief compared with conventional SCS for patients with axial back pain, with or without radicular pain.

Abstract IntroductionRadiofrequency ablation (RFA) and spinal cord stimulation (SCS) are 2 common modalities used in management of various pain conditions. RFA generates heat and an electromagnetic field that can theoretically interfere with the functionality and longevity of the SCS device. This is problematic for patients who need RFA and have previously undergone implantation of an SCS device.Case DescriptionWe present a case highlighting the safe use of bipolar RFA in a patient who had previously undergone implantation of a cervical SCS device.DiscussionWe also present device‐specific industry guidelines and recommendations for performing RFA in patients following SCS device implantation.

Objective Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is an evidence-based therapy for the treatment of refractory pain. Current American College of Graduate Medical Education requirements for pain medicine fellowship graduation include observation of five neuromodulation cases. Matriculating fellows have varying degrees of technical skill, training, and experience. The purpose of this study was to use an innovative skill-based assessment tool using the validated Zwisch scale to evaluate fellow surgical performance during SCS cases. Design Cross-sectional survey Setting Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. Subjects Consultant faculty (10) in the Division of Pain Medicine and pain medicine fellows (5). Methods A list of faculty-driven neuromodulation surgical objectives was formed and a rubric was created that focused on technical approach, imaging, epidural access and wound closure. Consultants who perform surgical cases were instructed to use the Zwisch scale as a guide to evaluate fellow surgical performance during a neuromodulation case. Faculty and fellows were surveyed before and after implementation of the tool to determine their satisfaction with use of the skill assessment tool. Results The consultants reported they were more satisfied, consistent, and efficient with feedback provided to the trainee on every aspect of neuromodulation surgical cases. The improvement was most significant during the fellows’ intraoperative skill assessment. The fellows indicated increased satisfaction, improved communication, and increased efficiency of feedback when the tool was utilized. The fellows reported greater intraoperative skill assessment and consistency of feedback provided. Conclusions The diverse nature of primary specialty backgrounds observed in pain medicine fellowship training offers a unique opportunity to assess and improve fellow skill and surgical competence in the field of neuromodulation. Both faculty and fellows reported improved satisfaction, consistency and efficiency with feedback provided. Importantly, this pilot project observed that implementation of a skill assessment tool was beneficial for both the faculty and fellow as the feedback received was viewed as strongly beneficial to the educational experience.

Background Women are entering medical school in record numbers, but multiple male-dominated medical specialties still exist, including pain medicine. It is not well-understood how gender diversity in academic pain medicine faculty affects fellow matriculation between female and male applicants. Objective We conducted a survey to ascertain whether gender diversity of those in leadership roles in pain medicine programs impacts the gender diversity of fellows in those programs. Methods A questionnaire was delivered to all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited pain medicine fellowships to assess their demographic data in 2018. Program characteristics are summarized using median (25th, 75th) for continuous variables and frequency counts and percentages for categorical variables. Analyses were then performed using a generalized linear mixed model with a logit link function and fellowship program included as a random effect. The gender of the fellow was the dependent variable and the program characteristics were the explanatory variables. Results Data from 45 of 104 fellowship programs (43% response rate) are included. From univariate analysis, the odds of a fellow being female were higher in programs with a female program director (OR=2.17, 95% CI 1.29 to 3.65, p=0.004) and in programs with a higher percentage of female faculty (OR=1.02, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.04, p=0.027). From multivariable analysis, having a female program director was the only program characteristic found to be significantly associated with female fellows (OR=2.07, 95% CI 1.05 to 4.11, p=0.037). Conclusions Pain medicine fellowship programs with a female program director were significantly more likely to have female fellows.