ArticleClinical parkinsonism & related disorders2024
Movement disorder Deep brain stimulation Hybridization: Patient and caregiver outcomes.
Article in Clinical parkinsonism & related disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Deep brain stimulation (DBS) is a well-established surgical treatment for certain movement disorders and involves the implantation of brain electrodes connected to implantable pulse generators (IPGs). As more device manufacturers have entered the market, some IPG technology has been designed to be compatible with brain electrodes from other manufacturers, which has facilitated the hybridization of implant technology. The aim of this study was to assess the benefits of hybridization of non-rechargeable, constant voltage IPGs to rechargeable, constant current IPGs. Methods: A list of DBS movement disorder patients who had their non-rechargeable, constant voltage IPGs replaced with rechargeable, constant current IPGs from a different manufacturer was compiled. Structured surveys of these patients, and their caregivers when applicable, were undertaken to determine both patient and caregiver satisfaction in this DBS hybridization strategy. Results: Eighteen patients met inclusion criteria and twelve patients or their caregivers completed the structured survey (67% response rate). Nine patients had Parkinson's disease (75%), three had essential tremor (25%). Nine (75%) were converted from bilateral single-channel IPGs, and three (25%) were converted from a unilateral dual-channel IPGs. Overall, 92% of patients and caregivers surveyed reported improvement or no change in their symptoms, 92% reported a decrease or no change in their medication requirements, and 92% report they are satisfied or very satisfied with their IPG hybridization and would recommend the surgery to similar patients. There were no immediate surgical complications. Conclusion: In this series of movement disorder DBS patients, surgery was safe and patient and caregiver satisfaction were high with a hybridization of non-rechargeable, constant voltage IPGs to rechargeable, constant current IPGs.
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.