ArticleNorth American Spine Society journal2025
Spinal cord stimulator utilization trends and predictors of unsuccessful trial-to-implant conversion.
Article in North American Spine Society journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07743905 (Virtual Pain Neuroscience Education for Patients Undergoing Spinal Cord Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Virtual Pain Neuroscience Education for Patients Undergoing Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Hybrid Effectiveness-Implementation Pilot Trial
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Incidence and etiology of impediments to spinal cord stimulator trial progression.Interventional pain medicine · 2026Article
- Perioperative management of spinal cord stimulators in patients undergoing non-SCS spine surgery: A retrospective cohort study.Interventional pain medicine · 2026Article
- Psychometric and Molecular Profiling to Predict Outcomes of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Pain: A Pilot Study.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
- General Innovations in Pain Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- 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
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Spinal cord stimulators (SCS) are neuromodulatory devices that may be considered for refractory back or neurologic pain. Trends in SCS utilization and factors associated with failure of trial-to-implant conversion are not well defined. Methods: Using the 2010 - 2022 PearlDiver Mariner Patient Claims Database, adults who underwent SCS trial were identified and categorized into those who did or did not undergo conversion to permanent SCS implantation. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify clinical (age, sex, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, and tobacco use) and non-clinical (insurance plan and US geographic region) characteristics associated with lower odds of trial-to-implant conversion.The annual incidences of SCS utilization, trial-to-implant conversion, and breakdown of specialties performing SCS implantation (pain specialists, neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons) were analyzed. Results: Of 265,756 patients undergoing SCS trial, 178,144 (67%) went on to receive permanent implant while 87,612 (33%) did not. Factors independently associated with lower odds of successful trial-to-implant conversion included: older age (OR: 0.97 per decade increase), male sex (OR: 0.93, relative to female), lower comorbidity burden (OR: 0.96 per 1-point ECI decrease), no documented tobacco use (OR: 0.94), insurance (relative to Commercial, Medicaid [OR: 0.78] and Medicare [OR: 0.85]) and geographic region (relative to Midwest, Northeast [OR: 0.63], West [OR: 0.82], and South [OR: 0.85]) ( Conclusions: The overall utilization of SCS and trial-to-implant conversion rates have increased over the years. By defining clinical and nonclinical factors associated with failure for conversion from trial to implant, selection processes can be further optimized by specialists performing these procedures.
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.