Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41756133›Full record

ArticleEpilepsy & behavior reports2026

Current best medical practices survey in vagus nerve stimulation programming.

Debra T Moore-Hill, Molly Butler, Danielle L Weiss, Leila A T Hill, Hunter Smith, Brandon Pope, Chasitie McIntosh, Luca Debs, Amir A Mbonde, Anthony Murro and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epilepsy & behavior reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Debra T Moore-HillMedical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Molly ButlerMedical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Danielle L WeissMedical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Leila A T HillMedical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Hunter SmithUniversity of Tennessee Medical Center, Knoxville, TN, USA.
Brandon PopeWellstar-Medical College of Georgia Health, Department of Neurology, Augusta, GA, USA.
Chasitie McIntoshMedical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Luca DebsMedical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Amir A MbondeMedical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Anthony MurroMedical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.
Fernando L ValeMedical College of Georgia at Augusta University, Augusta, GA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vagal Nerve Stimulator Therapy (VNS) uses programmable duty cycle (DC) and three modes of stimulation: normal mode (NM), heart-rate responsive automatic stimulation mode (AS), and on-demand magnet mode (MM). VNS therapy guidelines exist however; they may not represent real-world best clinical practices. This study aims to identify current best medical practices in VNS programming. Epilepsy VNS practitioners received an anonymous, deidentified IRB-approved online survey at the American Epilepsy Society Meeting (12/3/2023, Orlando Florida). The majority of respondents were US-practicing (n = 45, 78%) epileptologists (n = 43, 74%) programming VNS devices in 50 patients or less in the preceding two years prior to the creation of the survey (n = 39, 67%). Most programmed VNS independently and trained others how to program VNS devices (n = 49, 84%). Large variations in programming of NM, AS, and DC occurred. The median initial and maximum target NM output was 1-1.25 mA (n = 18, 31%) and 2-2.5 mA (n = 23, 40%) respectively. Most (n = 37, 64%) programmed AS current higher than NM. A third subset programmed initial and final AS heart-rate increase thresholds at 40% and 20% respectively (n = 19, 33%). The median anticipated final DC target was 35%. Most achieved final VNS settings at or before 40 weeks (n = 47, 81%) and declared VNS non-responders at 13-36 months after initial programming (n = 37, 64%). Our study identifies variability in VNS programming practices amongst epilepsy practitioners highlighting gaps between guideline recommendations and their clinical application. This study offers critical insights into optimal VNS therapy settings and optimization of VNS therapy outcomes for patients with DRE.

Indexed as

1710: Clinical Neurology3120: Epilepsy5940: Neuromodulation

Identifiers

PMID41756133
PMCPMC12933614

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.