ArticleEuropean journal of pain (London, England)2022
Short- and long-term effects of conventional spinal cord stimulation on chronic pain and health perceptions: A longitudinal controlled trial.
Article in European journal of pain (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The effectiveness of spinal cord stimulation combined with physiotherapy in the management of chronic pain in adults: a systematic review.Frontiers in pain research (Lausanne, Switzerland) · 2025Pooled it
- ECAP-controlled closed-loop versus open-loop SCS for the treatment of chronic pain: 36-month results of the EVOKE blinded randomized clinical trial.Regional anesthesia and pain medicine · 2024Trial
- Prospective evaluation of spinal cord stimulation in refractory angina: insights from a single-center cohort.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
- Real-World Outcomes of Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Consecutive Institutional Experience with 505 Trials, Trial-to-Implant Ratio, Long-Term Efficacy, and Explantation Risk Factors.Journal of pain research · 2025Article
- Neuromodulation and Habituation: A Literature Review and Conceptional Analysis of Sustaining Therapeutic Efficacy and Mitigating Habituation.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- Large-scale real-world data on a multidisciplinary approach to spinal cord stimulation for persistent spinal pain syndromes: first evaluation of the Neuro-PainFrontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Low Back Pain Syndrome: Mechanisms of Modulation, Technical Features and Clinical Application.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Short- and long-term effects of conventional spinal cord stimulation on chronic pain and health perceptions: A longitudinal controlled trial.European journal of pain (London, England) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effectiveness and long-term outcomes of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) are not fully established, especially considering that data from patients who withdrew from the trial are rarely analysed, which may lead to overestimation of SCS efficacy. We evaluated short- and long-term effects of SCS on chronic pain and perceived health, beyond natural variability in these outcomes.
methodsIn a prospective design, 176 chronic pain patients referred to SCS were evaluated five times (baseline; retest ~6 weeks later; post-SCS trial; 8 and 28 weeks post-permanent implantation). Patients whose SCS trial failed (Temp group) were followed up and compared to those who underwent permanent SCS (Perm group).
resultsAnalyses revealed a non-linear (U-shaped) trend significantly different between the two groups. In the Perm group, a significant improvement occurred post-SCS implantation in pain severity, pain interference, health-related quality of life and self-rated health, which was followed by gradual worsening and return to baseline values at end of follow-up. In the Temp group, only minor changes occurred in these outcomes over time. On average, baseline and end of follow-up values in the Perm and Temp groups were similar: ~40% in each group exhibited an increase in pain severity over time and 38% and 33%, respectively, exhibited reductions in pain severity over time.
conclusionsSince the greatest improvement in the outcome measures occurred from baseline to post-SCS trial (T1-T3) followed by a gradual decline in the effect, it appears that SCS may not be effective for the majority of chronic pain patients. SIGNIFICANCE: This longitudinal study evaluated short and long term effects of spinal cord stimulation (SCS) on chronic pain outcome measures, beyond their natural variation in time. Despite significant short term improvements, by the end of the seven months' follow-up, the outcomes in the treatment group (people who received the permanent implantation) were similar to those of the control group (people whose SCS trial failed and did not continue to permanent implantation) suggesting SCS may not be cost-effective for chronic pain patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.