RestoreSensor Study
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Actual)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Locations
-
-
Alabama
-
Huntsville, Alabama, United States, 35801
-
-
California
-
Oceanside, California, United States, 92056
-
-
Minnesota
-
Edina, Minnesota, United States, 55435
-
-
Nevada
-
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States, 89149
-
-
New Jersey
-
Voorhees, New Jersey, United States, 08043
-
-
Oregon
-
Eugene, Oregon, United States, 97401
-
-
Texas
-
Dallas, Texas, United States, 75237
-
San Antonio, Texas, United States, 78229
-
San Antonio, Texas, United States, 78258
-
-
Utah
-
Salt Lake City, Utah, United States, 84106
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Meets the indications as an appropriate surgical candidate (after successful SCS screening trial) for implant of a neurostimulation system for spinal cord stimulation (SCS) treatment of trunk and/or limb pain, per labeled indications
- 18 years of age or older
- Willing and able to attend visits and comply with the study protocol
- Capable of using the patient programmer and recharging the neurostimulator (INS), able to read and answer questionnaires in English, without assistance of a caregiver
- Males and non-pregnant females
Exclusion Criteria:
- Has had a prior implantable SCS neurostimulation system
- Currently enrolled, or plans to enroll in another investigational device or drug trial during the study
- Has unresolved legal issues related to their pain condition for which they would be receiving neurostimulation
- Requires cervical placement of leads.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Crossover Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Other: 6-week AdaptiveStim followed by 6-week manual programming
|
Adjustments to stimulation settings are automatic when the AdaptiveStim feature of the device is turned "ON" and manual when the AdaptiveStim feature of the device is turned "OFF".
|
|
Other: 6-week manual followed by 6-week AdaptiveStim programming
|
Adjustments to stimulation settings are automatic when the AdaptiveStim feature of the device is turned "ON" and manual when the AdaptiveStim feature of the device is turned "OFF".
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Subjects With Improved Pain Relief and/or Convenience During the AdaptiveStim Programming Arm Relative to the Manual Programming Arm
Time Frame: 16 weeks post-implant
|
After subjects experienced both AdaptiveStim and manual programming at 16 weeks post-implant, subjects were asked to compare pain relief and convenience when they had AdaptiveStim ON to AdaptiveStim OFF in two separate domains using two 5-point Likert scales.
The outcome measure for the primary objective is the percentage of subjects who report improved pain relief with no loss of convenience or improved convenience with no loss of pain relief during the AdaptiveStim programming arm relative to the manual programming arm.
These subjects were considered successful for the primary objective.
|
16 weeks post-implant
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Percentage of Subjects With Worsened Pain Relief When Using AdaptiveStim Compared to Manual Programming
Time Frame: 16 weeks post-implant
|
The pain relief question was a 5-point Likert scale question comparing pain relief when using AdaptiveStim programming relative to manual programming after subjects finished both programming periods.
The choices were much worse pain relief with AdaptiveStim, somewhat worse pain relief with AdaptiveStim, no difference in pain relief, somewhat better pain relief with AdaptiveStim, and much better pain relief with AdaptiveStim.
Subjects who had worsening pain relief were defined as subjects who responded "much worse pain relief with AdaptiveStim" or "somewhat worse pain relief with AdaptiveStim".
|
16 weeks post-implant
|
|
Manual Adjustments Presented as Button Presses
Time Frame: Baseline, 10 weeks and 16 weeks post-implant
|
The number of individual adjustments, ie, button presses, were recorded automatically in the patient programmer, which was specifically designed for this study.
The number of button presses per day for manual patient programmer adjustments during the manual programming arm and the AdaptiveStim programming arm of the study were compared.
|
Baseline, 10 weeks and 16 weeks post-implant
|
|
NPRS Scores From Baseline to Follow-up Visits at 10 Weeks and 16 Weeks Post-implant
Time Frame: Baseline, 10 weeks and 16 weeks post-implant
|
The 11-point (ie, 0-10) numeric rating scale of pain intensity (NPRS) was used to assess the overall pain at baseline and follow-up visits.
In the pain diary, subjects were presented a numeric scale with numbers from 0 to 10, with 0 meaning "No pain" and 10 meaning "Pain as bad as you can imagine," accompanied by the instructions "Please rate your pain by indicating the number that best describes your pain on average in the last 24 hours."
The subjects were asked to complete a diary for 7 consecutive days before implant, 10 weeks, and 16 weeks post-implant visits.
|
Baseline, 10 weeks and 16 weeks post-implant
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Publications and helpful links
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start
Study Start
Primary Completion (Actual)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Actual)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Estimate)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimate)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 1651
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.