The Optimal Patient Profile and Appropriate Role of Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) for Patients with Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome-Type 1 (PSPS-T1) Not Suitable for Spine Surgery: A European Modified Delphi Consensus.

IF 2.5 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Journal of Pain Research Pub Date : 2025-09-25 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/JPR.S533951
Tobias L Schulte, María Reyes Fernández-Marín, Roberto Gazzeri, Oliver Hamel, Jan Willem Kallewaard, Kavita Poply, Iris Smet, Jan Vesper, Erik Van de Kelft
{"title":"The Optimal Patient Profile and Appropriate Role of Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) for Patients with Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome-Type 1 (PSPS-T1) Not Suitable for Spine Surgery: A European Modified Delphi Consensus.","authors":"Tobias L Schulte, María Reyes Fernández-Marín, Roberto Gazzeri, Oliver Hamel, Jan Willem Kallewaard, Kavita Poply, Iris Smet, Jan Vesper, Erik Van de Kelft","doi":"10.2147/JPR.S533951","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Chronic lower back pain (CLBP) is a debilitating condition, and a leading cause of disability associated with significant negative impacts on patients' quality of life (QoL) and mental health. In both Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Types 1 and 2 (PSPS-T1/2) patients, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapy has shown favorable outcomes including improved QoL and patient satisfaction, reductions in opioid use, and an acceptable safety profile. This consensus aimed to define the PSPS-T1 patient profile for SCS to maximize its benefits in clinical settings and allow budget holders to quantify the patient population and allocate budget accordingly.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study used a modified Delphi methodology. A literature review was conducted, followed by multidisciplinary steering group discussions that resulted in the development of 32 statements under five key domains. These statements, along with a four-point Likert scale, were incorporated into a survey distributed across seven European countries to 144 healthcare professionals experienced in pain management. The respondents included orthopedic surgeons (n=50), pain specialists (n=48), and neurosurgeons (n=46). The consensus agreement threshold was set at 75%.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Consensus was achieved for 30 of the 32 statements, with 11 statements (34%) reaching ≥90% agreement. Two statements did not achieve consensus. Based on the consensus achieved in the study, an algorithm is proposed to assist in patient selection for SCS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This consensus provides recommendations on optimal patient profiles, referral processes, diagnostic procedures, and a decision-making algorithm for PSPS-T1 patients who are ineligible for spine surgery in Europe.</p>","PeriodicalId":16661,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain Research","volume":"18 ","pages":"4959-4973"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12478228/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/JPR.S533951","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Chronic lower back pain (CLBP) is a debilitating condition, and a leading cause of disability associated with significant negative impacts on patients' quality of life (QoL) and mental health. In both Persistent Spinal Pain Syndrome Types 1 and 2 (PSPS-T1/2) patients, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) therapy has shown favorable outcomes including improved QoL and patient satisfaction, reductions in opioid use, and an acceptable safety profile. This consensus aimed to define the PSPS-T1 patient profile for SCS to maximize its benefits in clinical settings and allow budget holders to quantify the patient population and allocate budget accordingly.

Methods: This study used a modified Delphi methodology. A literature review was conducted, followed by multidisciplinary steering group discussions that resulted in the development of 32 statements under five key domains. These statements, along with a four-point Likert scale, were incorporated into a survey distributed across seven European countries to 144 healthcare professionals experienced in pain management. The respondents included orthopedic surgeons (n=50), pain specialists (n=48), and neurosurgeons (n=46). The consensus agreement threshold was set at 75%.

Results: Consensus was achieved for 30 of the 32 statements, with 11 statements (34%) reaching ≥90% agreement. Two statements did not achieve consensus. Based on the consensus achieved in the study, an algorithm is proposed to assist in patient selection for SCS.

Conclusion: This consensus provides recommendations on optimal patient profiles, referral processes, diagnostic procedures, and a decision-making algorithm for PSPS-T1 patients who are ineligible for spine surgery in Europe.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

不适合脊柱手术的持续性脊柱疼痛综合征1型(PSPS-T1)患者的最佳患者特征和脊髓刺激(SCS)的适当作用:欧洲修改的德尔菲共识。
目的:慢性下背部疼痛(CLBP)是一种使人衰弱的疾病,是导致残疾的主要原因,对患者的生活质量(QoL)和心理健康有显著的负面影响。在1型和2型持续性脊柱疼痛综合征(PSPS-T1/2)患者中,脊髓刺激(SCS)治疗显示出良好的结果,包括改善了生活质量和患者满意度,减少了阿片类药物的使用,以及可接受的安全性。该共识旨在定义SCS的PSPS-T1患者概况,以最大限度地发挥其在临床环境中的益处,并允许预算持有人量化患者群体并相应地分配预算。方法:本研究采用改进的德尔菲法。进行了文献综述,随后进行了多学科指导小组讨论,结果在五个关键领域下制定了32项声明。这些陈述,连同李克特四分制,被纳入一项调查,分布在七个欧洲国家,144名有疼痛管理经验的医疗保健专业人员。受访者包括骨科医生(n=50),疼痛专家(n=48)和神经外科医生(n=46)。达成共识的门槛设定为75%。结果:32个表述中有30个表述达到一致,其中11个(34%)表述达到≥90%的一致。有两项声明没有达成共识。基于研究中达成的共识,提出了一种算法来辅助SCS的患者选择。结论:这一共识为欧洲不适合脊柱手术的PSPS-T1患者提供了最佳患者概况、转诊流程、诊断程序和决策算法的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pain Research
Journal of Pain Research CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
3.70%
发文量
411
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Pain Research is an international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that welcomes laboratory and clinical findings in the fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Original research, reviews, symposium reports, hypothesis formation and commentaries are all considered for publication. Additionally, the journal now welcomes the submission of pain-policy-related editorials and commentaries, particularly in regard to ethical, regulatory, forensic, and other legal issues in pain medicine, and to the education of pain practitioners and researchers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信