Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29042816›Full record

ArticleJournal of pain research2017

Incidence and predictive factors of spinal cord stimulation treatment after lumbar spine surgery.

Merja Vakkala, Voitto Järvimäki, Hannu Kautiainen, Maija Haanpää, Seppo Alahuhta

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pain research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Merja VakkalaDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Medical Research Center Oulu (MRC Oulu), Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, Oulu.
Voitto JärvimäkiDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Medical Research Center Oulu (MRC Oulu), Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, Oulu.
Hannu KautiainenPrimary Health Care Unit, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio.
Maija HaanpääDepartment of Neurosurgery, Helsinki University Hospital.
Seppo AlahuhtaDepartment of Anaesthesiology, Medical Research Center Oulu (MRC Oulu), Oulu University Hospital and University of Oulu, Oulu.
Oulu University Hospital · FIKuopio University Hospital · FIUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSpinal cord stimulation (SCS) is recommended for the treatment of postsurgical chronic back and leg pain refractory to other treatments. We wanted to estimate the incidence and predictive factors of SCS treatment in our lumbar surgery cohort. PATIENTS AND

methodsThree questionnaires (a self-made questionnaire, the Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire, and the Beck Depression Inventory) were sent to patients aged 18-65 years with no contraindications for the use of SCS, and who had undergone non-traumatic lumbar spine surgery in the Oulu University Hospital between June 2005 and May 2008. Patients who had a daily pain intensity of ≥5/10 with predominant radicular component were interviewed by telephone.

resultsAfter exclusions, 814 patients remained in this cohort. Of those, 21 patients had received SCS by the end of June 2015. Fifteen (71%) of these received benefit and continued with the treatment. Complications were rare. The number of patients who replied to the postal survey were 537 (66%). Eleven of them had undergone SCS treatment after their reply. Features predicting SCS implantation were daily or continuous pain, higher intensities of pain with predominant radicular pain, more severe pain-related functional disability, a higher prevalence of depressive symptoms, and reduced benefit from pain medication. The mean waiting time was 65 months (26-93 months). One hundred patients were interviewed by telephone. Fourteen seemed to be potential SCS candidates. From the eleven patients who underwent SCS after responding to the survey, two were classified as potential candidates in the phone interview, while nine were other patients. Twelve patients are still waiting for treatment to commence.

conclusionIn our region, the SCS treatment is used only for very serious pain conditions. Waiting time is too long and it may be the reason why this treatment option is not offered to all candidates.

Indexed as

Beck Depression Inventorychronic back and leg paindecompression surgerydisc surgeryOswestry Disability Indexspinal fusion

Identifiers

PMID29042816
PMCPMC5634380
OpenAlexW2761807624

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.