Observational studyThe Medical journal of Australia2025
Spinal cord stimulation patterns of care, re-interventions, and costs for private health insurers, Australia, 2011-22: a retrospective observational study.
Observational study in The Medical journal of Australia, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Psychometric and Molecular Profiling to Predict Outcomes of Spinal Cord Stimulation for Chronic Pain: A Pilot Study.Journal of pain research · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate spinal cord stimulation patterns of care, the proportions of people who require unplanned surgical interventions after receiving definitive spinal cord stimulator implants, and the costs to private health insurers in Australia. STUDY
designRetrospective observational study; analysis of deidentified private health care insurers benefits payments data. SETTING,
participantsPeople admitted to hospital for spinal cord stimulation-related surgical procedures, 11 January 2011 - 13 April 2022, with full or partial costs coverage by five general private health care insurers.
main outcome measuresPatterns of care; proportions of people with stimulator implants who subsequently require surgical re-intervention, overall and within 36 months of receiving definitive implants; costs to insurer for trial, definitive implantation, and re-interventions.
resultsWe analysed data for 11 451 admissions of 5839 people; mean age at first admission was 60.2 years (standard deviation, 15.4 years), 3717 people were women (63.7%). Median follow-up time was 48 months (interquartile range [IQR], 33-72 months). Definitive stimulators were implanted in 4361 people (74.7%), of whom 3244 had previously had at least one stimulation trial (74.3%; one trial only: 2970 people); 1478 people (25.3%) had trials but never proceeded to definitive implants. Surgical re-interventions were required by 1011 people with definitive implants (23.2%); the median time to the first re-intervention was 16.8 months (IQR, 6.2-39.8 months). The cumulative probability of requiring surgical re-intervention at 36 months was 0.35. The median cost to the insurer of a trial implant was $13 689, for a definitive implant (device, medical, and hospital costs for initial procedure and re-interventions) $55 635.
conclusionsAbout one in four people will require surgical re-intervention within 36 months of receiving a definitive spinal cord stimulator, and the costs for the procedure are high. Both findings are concerning given the paucity of evidence for their efficacy in treating chronic pain.
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.