ArticleEpilepsy & behavior reports2025
Practical Considerations for the rapid titration of VNS.
Article in Epilepsy & behavior reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- CORE-VNS: Dosing and titration of VNS therapy in contemporary clinical practice.Epilepsy & behavior reports · 2026Article
- Successful application of vagus nerve stimulation in super refractory status epilepticus associated with MERRF syndrome.Epilepsy & behavior reports · 2025Article
- Vagus nerve stimulation and fast parameter programming protocol in children with febrile infection-related epilepsy syndrome in ICU.Neurotherapeutics : the journal of the American Society for Experimental NeuroTherapeutics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
For patients with drug-resistant epilepsy who are not candidates for epilepsy surgery, Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is the most widely available neuromodulation option and has been available in several countries for 30 years. Given its broad availability and extended history on the market, many healthcare providers (HCPs) have developed individualized practice habits regarding the titration and dosing of VNS. This study provides novel evidence to describe the extent to which VNS management differs among providers and discusses recent literature that indicates how unique programming approaches may impact patient outcomes. In this work, practice habits regarding the titration and dosing of VNS were explored through a survey of HCPs and an examination of ongoing study data collected as part of the CORE-VNS Study. The global survey revealed significant variability in dosing and titration habits. Providers reported a wide range of initial/maximum target doses and time-to-dose, even if the population averages approximated guidance from professional societies and the manufacturer's labeling. Variable dosing and titration were reflected in varied perception of how long it takes to realize the clinical benefits of VNS. In the CORE-VNS Study, this reported experience was represented in how different generator models were used, with users of SenTiva (and the Scheduled Programming feature) depicting faster time-to-dose than those using earlier models of VNS. Our results suggest VNS providers would benefit from continued training on the use of VNS and the use of the scheduled programming feature to enhance consistency of VNS management among providers.
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.