Pain Practice最新文献

{"title":"A Retrospective Evaluation of Adverse Events in Minimally Invasive Posterior Approach With Bone Allograft in Sacroiliac Joint Fusion.","authors":"Kwasi Ampomah, Abigail T Tisler, Anuj Shah, Rosa Garcia, Yue Yin, Timothy R Deer","doi":"10.1111/papr.70071","DOIUrl":"10.1111/papr.70071","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction is a significant contributor to chronic low back pain. Between 70% and 85% of people will suffer from low back pain (LBP) at some stage in their lives, and 15%-30% of these individuals will experience pain associated with the SIJ. With the limitations of conservative treatments in addressing the underlying pain and dysfunction, minimally invasive sacroiliac joint fusion has emerged as a promising intervention. Robust studies targeted towards examining complications associated with posterior approach SIJ fusions are rare; thus, this study aims to assess the incidence of adverse events (AEs) associated with posterior approach SIJ fusions using a cadaveric graft joint stabilization system in a clinical setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective single-site study was conducted reviewing 260 patients with chronic SIJ dysfunction refractory to conservative management. Patients underwent SIJ fusion using the almond-shaped bone allograft with bone window (LinQ system, Painteq, and Tampa Florida) and were monitored for AEs up to 6 months post procedure. Descriptive statistics and hierarchical generalized linear models were used to analyze the data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The cohort primarily consisted of females (70.27%) with a mean age of 65.21 years. The incidence of AEs was low, with 2.3% at 3 months and 1.9% at 6 months post intervention. No major serious adverse events occurred related to the surgery. Minor adverse events included superficial infection and limited hematoma. All events resolved without permanent harm. There were no device-related events.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The posterior approach to minimally invasive SIJ fusion using a human bone allograft demonstrates a favorable safety profile with a low incidence of adverse events.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 7","pages":"e70071"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144874594","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Once-Daily Prolonged-Release Pregabalin for the Treatment of Patients With Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Active, and Placebo-Controlled Trial.","authors":"Shilpi Dhawan, Amol Bongirwar, Marta Muñoz-Tudurí, Aman Khanna Romesh, Prakash H Kurmi, Rahul Tulshidas Jankar","doi":"10.1111/papr.70061","DOIUrl":"10.1111/papr.70061","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the efficacy and safety of a once-daily prolonged release (PR) pregabalin formulation to pregabalin immediate release (IR) in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN).</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>This was a non-inferiority, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multiple-dose, multicenter, active and placebo controlled, three-arm, parallel study. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive pregabalin PR tablet, pregabalin IR hard capsule (Lyrica) or placebo at an optimized dose based on individual subject's response and tolerability for 13 weeks. The primary efficacy outcome was the change in the mean weekly pain score from baseline to end of treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 453 patients were randomized. In the per protocol (PP) analysis set, the least square mean (LSM) difference between test and reference treatment for the change in weekly pain score from baseline to end of treatment was 0.06 (95% CI: -0.28, 0.41, p = 0.7121), indicating that pregabalin PR was non-inferior to pregabalin IR. In the Full Analysis Set (FAS), the LSM of change in mean weekly pain score from baseline to end of treatment for test, reference, and placebo groups were -3.43, -3.49, and -3.04, respectively. Test and reference products were superior to placebo (p = 0.0158 and 0.0047, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The efficacy and safety of pregabalin PR was comparable to pregabalin IR for the treatment of pain in patients with DPN.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 7","pages":"e70061"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144650107","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"14. Discogenic Low Back Pain.","authors":"Wouter K M van Os, Ricardo Alvarez-Jimenez, Steven P Cohen, Milan P Stojanovic, Ricardo Ruiz-Lopez, Jan Van Zundert, Jan Willem Kallewaard","doi":"10.1111/papr.70062","DOIUrl":"10.1111/papr.70062","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Discogenic low back pain can be severely disabling, clinically challenging to diagnose, and expensive to treat. Disc degeneration is characterized by disc dehydration, which diminishes the ability of the disc to distribute pressure, making it more susceptible to damage, and leading to annular tears, fissures, and a higher incidence of herniation. Furthermore, the abnormal annular in-growth of nerves and inflammation of the disc increase the number and sensitivity of nociceptors, leading to chronic discogenic low back pain (CDLBP). The purpose of this article was to review the current literature.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this narrative review, the literature on the diagnosis and treatment of discogenic low back pain was summarized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Symptoms and findings during physical examination may guide the diagnostic process but are not specific or sensitive regarding CDLBP. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) can rule out other pathology and provides a basis for the decision about whether to perform pressure-controlled provocative discography, the current diagnostic standard. Conservative care includes pain education programs, structured exercise therapies, psychological interventions, and pharmacological treatment. Various minimally invasive interventional treatment strategies for refractory CDLBP exist, of which biacuplasty or cooled radiofrequency can be used as therapeutic options. Promising new treatments include intradiscal injection of mesenchymal stem cells and platelet-rich plasma, radiofrequency ablation of the sinuvertebral and basivertebral nerves, dorsal root ganglion stimulation, and spinal cord stimulation. Future research regarding the safety and efficacy of these treatments should include large randomized controlled trials with strict inclusion criteria and longer follow-up periods. A primary focus should be on increasing the evidence base for diagnosing discogenic low back pain.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 7","pages":"e70062"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12301617/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144732720","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Gabapentinoids for Neuropathic Pain After Spinal Cord Injury: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"Rafael Batista João, Jilly Octoria Tagore Chan, Ewen Shengyao Huang, Genesis Pamela Mora Rosas, Aníbal Valencia Vasquez, Sanjana Thota, Julyana Medeiros Dantas","doi":"10.1111/papr.70060","DOIUrl":"10.1111/papr.70060","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and aim: </strong>Spinal cord injury (SCI) is a debilitating condition frequently associated with chronic symptoms such as central neuropathic pain (CNP) and its related complications. Gabapentinoids are often used in the treatment of post-SCI CNP; however, the optimal management of this condition is still unclear. This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of gabapentinoids compared with placebo in post-SCI patients affected by CNP.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing gabapentinoids (gabapentin, pregabalin, or mirogabalin) with placebo in post-SCI patients experiencing CNP. We calculated mean differences (MD) and risk ratios (RR) for continuous and dichotomous outcomes, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Pain was measured on a 0 to 10 numerical rating scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We included 5 RCTs comprising 682 patients. The mean age was 50.2 years, and 83.8% were male. When compared with placebo, patients treated with gabapentinoids experienced a significant decrease in average daily pain (MD -1.75; 95% CI: -3.23 to -0.28; p = 0.02) and pain-related sleep interference (MD -0.99; 95% CI: -1.38 to -0.60; p < 0.001). Additionally, there were higher proportions of individuals with pain intensity relief ≥ 50% (RR 2.19; 95% CI: 1.47 to 3.25; p < 0.001) and with at least some perceived improvement on the clinical global impression scale (RR 1.71; 95% CI: 1.34 to 2.18, p < 0.001) in the gabapentinoids group compared to the placebo group. However, treatment with gabapentinoids was associated with a significantly increased risk of blurred vision (RR 8.55; 95% CI: 1.53 to 47.7; p = 0.02), somnolence (RR 3.77; 95% CI: 2.44 to 5.84; p < 0.001), peripheral edema (RR 2.86; 95% CI: 1.37 to 5.99; p < 0.01), and dizziness (RR 2.83; 95% CI: 1.67 to 4.78; p < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this meta-analysis of RCTs evaluating patients with CNP following SCI, gabapentinoids were associated with significant improvements in pain and pain-related sleep interference compared with placebo. Nonetheless, gabapentinoids significantly increased the risk of adverse events.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 7","pages":"e70060"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144668178","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Detailed Analysis of Back Pain: A Cross-Sectional Study of Epidemiology and Previous Therapies in a German Population.","authors":"Bernhard U Hoehl, Nima Taheri, Luis Alexander Becker, Lukas Mödl, Lukas Schönnagel, Christoph Stein, Matthias Pumberger, Hendrik Schmidt","doi":"10.1111/papr.70072","DOIUrl":"10.1111/papr.70072","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Diagnosing cLBP is complex due to its heterogeneity, lack of definitive biomarkers, and the subjective nature of pain. This study aims to analyze cLBP patients comprehensively, characterizing demographic and clinical profiles of patients and evaluating the types and effectiveness of previous treatments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From January 2022 to April 2024, we recruited 1262 participants aged between 18 and 72 years from the general population by advertisements and word-of-mouth propaganda. Collected data included a detailed medical history, standardized questionnaires (e.g., Von Korff) and a clinical examination.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our population included 471 (38%) with chronic back pain, 335 (27%) without back pain, and an additional group in between of 327 (26%) with intermittent back pain. The majority of participants experienced multifocal back pain, which was further subdivided based on the predominant pain localization. In patients with localized cLBP (median: 5 years, IQR: 1-10 years), the pain persisted for a shorter time than in the group with predominant back pain other than the lower back (median: 10 years, IQR: 5-15 years). The majority of participants did either use no pain medication at all (cLBP: 32%; iLBP: 37%; no-BP(2): 55%) or on-demand medication (cLBP: 56%; iLBP: 56%; no-BP(2): 39%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our data show considerable heterogeneity underlying the widespread diagnosis \"chronic back pain.\" Quantitative differentiation is difficult due to the low pain intensity on the day of the examination, and adequate treatment recommendations are challenging. To better understand chronic back pain, there is a strong need for a subclassification.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>German Clinical Trial Register: DRKS-ID: DRKS00027907.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 7","pages":"e70072"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12363625/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144874595","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Detecting Feigned Pain Using an Eye-Tracker Integrated Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS).","authors":"Yoram Braw, Itay Goor-Aryeh, Motti Ratmansky","doi":"10.1111/papr.70074","DOIUrl":"10.1111/papr.70074","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) is routinely used to assess pain severity. A recently developed NPRS integrated the pain scale with an eye tracker (NPRS_ETI). As part of this study, we explored the NPRS_ETI's utility to detect feigned pain, an ongoing challenge facing clinicians. To achieve this aim, chronic pain outpatients were randomly assigned to a simulation (i.e., requested to exaggerate their pain; n = 34) or a control condition (i.e., requested to genuinely report their pain severity; n = 35). They then rated their pain using the NPRS_ETI. Eye movement analyses indicated that simulators spent more time gazing at the higher NPRS_ETI pain ratings before providing their pain ratings and less time at the leftward (\"No pain\") anchor afterward. The discrimination capacities of these measures, however, were poor. In contrast, pain ratings using the NPRS_ETI showed excellent discriminative capacity, with a pain rating of 10 associated with 94.3% specificity and 26.5% sensitivity. Overall, the study's findings further indicate the feasibility of incorporating an eye tracker to evaluate the severity of pain. Though the findings at present do not support the utility of NPRS_ETI-based eye movement measures as validity indicators, pain ratings showed promise as a simple screen of feigned pain. The preliminary nature of the findings, however, calls for further research. Such research may aid in further developing effective indicators of feigned pain and hopefully clarify cognitive processes (e.g., experienced cognitive load) involved in pain deception. PERSPECTIVE: The NPRS_ETI enables pain ratings by patients with severe motor and speech impairments. While eye movements were not adequate in detecting feigned pain, participants' pain ratings showed initial promise. As this is a preliminary study, further research is recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 7","pages":"e70074"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12379137/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144964698","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Nerve Ablation Techniques Versus Sham Procedures in Knee Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.","authors":"César Romero Antunes Júnior, Rodrigo Campos de Oliveira Pinto, Eduardo Silva Reis Barreto, João Pedro Fernandes Gonçalves, Luiz Gustavo Albuquerque, Ian Garrido Kraychete, Liana Maria Torres de Araujo Azi, Liliane Elze Falcão Lins-Kusterer, Durval Campos Kraychete","doi":"10.1111/papr.70073","DOIUrl":"10.1111/papr.70073","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Ablative techniques, such as radiofrequency (RF) and cryoneurolysis (CN), are emerging as minimally invasive options for knee osteoarthritis (OA) pain management. However, inconsistencies in efficacy, technique variations, and a lack of standardized protocols limit their clinical application. This study addresses these gaps through a comprehensive meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ablative techniques in improving (1) pain, measured by the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), (2) functionality, assessed using the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC), and (3) quality of life and patient perception/satisfaction at 4, 12, and 24 weeks after treatment in patients with OA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and the Cochrane Database up to October 2024. Studies were included evaluating genicular or saphenous nerve ablation in adults with OA-associated pain. Outcomes of interest comprised pain reduction (VAS), functional improvement (WOMAC), patient perception, and quality of life. The risk of bias was evaluated using the RoB 2 tool, and data were analyzed using fixed- or random-effects models based on the degree of heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven studies involving a total of 437 patients were included. The meta-analysis demonstrated a significant reduction in pain in the ablation group at 4 weeks (MD = -1.60; 95% CI = -2.79 to -0.41), 12 weeks (MD = -1.97; 95% CI = -2.54 to -0.80), and 24 weeks (MD = -0.82; 95% CI = -1.41 to -0.23). CN consistently reduced pain (MD = -2.25 at 4 weeks, -1.12 at 12 weeks, and -1.28 at 24 weeks). Additionally, most evaluations did not show significant differences in patient perception and quality of life measures.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ablative techniques, particularly CN, show promise in reducing pain and enhancing function in patients with OA, offering a minimally invasive alternative for those with an inadequate response to conservative treatments. However, the observed outcome variability underscores the need for further research to standardize protocols and confirm long-term safety and efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 7","pages":"e70073"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144964702","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Painfully Obvious? Non-Operative Drivers of Post-Operative Pain and Opioid Exposure in a Predominantly Emergency Surgical Cohort: A Multicentre Observational Study Identifying Non-Operative, Perioperative Pain Correlates.","authors":"Brandon Stretton, Andrew E C Booth, Joshua Kovoor, Aashray Gupta, Ammar Zaka, Suzanne Edwards, Gerry O'Callaghan, Gregory B Crawford, Danny Liew, Guy Maddern, Stephen Bacchi","doi":"10.1111/papr.70068","DOIUrl":"10.1111/papr.70068","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>There are many non-operative factors (patient specific and management strategies) that are ubiquitous across all surgeries, which may influence perioperative pain. Recognition of these factors and their association with pain and analgesia requirements could provide avenues for improved perioperative care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All consecutive surgical patients admitted to six Australian tertiary hospitals (2017-2024) were included. The primary outcome was postoperative pain score (0 = no pain to 10 = unbearable pain). Additional outcomes included \"Pain Crisis\", quantity of postoperative and discharge analgesia. Pain scores were calculated using the median scores in the 5 days postoperatively. Postoperative analgesia was quantified by total morphine milligram equivalents (MME) in the 5 days postoperatively and discharge analgesia as MME provided on the discharge prescription. Multivariable binary logistic and linear regression models, with backward elimination, were employed with clinical characteristics and non-operative management factors included as predictors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 37,278 patients were included. Of these, 92% were unplanned emergency procedures. Psychological factors, such as depression and anxiety, significantly influenced perioperative pain and opioid use. An increase in socio-economic status was associated with less postoperative analgesia but more discharge analgesia. Older patients generally experienced less pain and required fewer opioids. Contrastingly, increased frailty correlated with higher opioid usage. Patients speaking English as a primary language reported more postoperative pain, without higher opioid use. Patients who did not identify as a First Nations Australian received 30% more opioids on discharge, despite no relationship with pain.</p><p><strong>Discussion/conclusion: </strong>An integrated, anticipatory, patient-centric approach to perioperative pain and analgesia that considers not only the surgical factors but also the individual's psychological and socio-economic context is required.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 7","pages":"e70068"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12334907/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144804469","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Delphi Consensus Revealing the Thoughts of Pain Management and Referral Specialties on the Use of SCS for Chronic Back Pain Patients Not Suitable for Spine Surgery.","authors":"David A Provenzano, Alaa Abd-Elsayed, Magdalena Anitescu, Domagoj Coric, Mehul J Desai, Jad G Khalil, Paul H Kim, Erika A Petersen, Glade Roper","doi":"10.1111/papr.70069","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.70069","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Chronic back pain is a significant global healthcare challenge, with a lifetime incidence affecting approximately 80% of people worldwide. Most patients respond positively to nonsurgical management, while a substantial proportion of the remainder obtain relief from surgical therapy. For the minority of patients with chronic back pain who do not respond to conventional medical management (CMM) and are not candidates for spine surgery, spinal cord stimulation (SCS) may be a viable treatment option. This Delphi consensus focused on identifying the thoughts and opinions of pain management and referral specialties on the use of SCS in patients with chronic back pain who are not suitable for spine surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A steering group of US healthcare professionals specialized in spine surgery and chronic back pain management generated 35 statements across six main domains. Using a four-point Likert scale, the survey was created and shared with a wider panel of specialists. Results were analyzed to produce an aggregated agreement level for each statement. The consensus threshold was set at 75% agreement, which is defined as strong consensus, and ≥ 90% agreement was considered powerful consensus.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 211 responses were received from the following specialties: pain physician (18%; n = 38), physical therapist (18%; n = 38), orthopedic surgeon (18%; n = 37), neurosurgeon (17%; n = 36), primary care physician (15%; n = 32), and musculoskeletal radiologist (14%; n = 30). Of the 35 consensus statements developed for broader testing, 30/35 (86%) achieved consensus; 18 (51%) of which achieved ≥ 90% agreement. The remaining five (15%) statements failed to achieve consensus among the wider panel.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on the agreement scores, the steering group agreed on seven key findings to consider for pain management in patients with chronic back pain who are not candidates for spine surgery. These findings are opinion-based and are meant to be a starting point to help identify appropriate patients who may benefit from SCS therapy and when an evaluation for SCS candidacy should be considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 7","pages":"e70069"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"144964719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Supplement: Abstracts of the Algos 2025 International Symposium, 25-28 September 2025, Rodos Palace Hotel, Rodos.","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/papr.70077","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/papr.70077","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":19974,"journal":{"name":"Pain Practice","volume":"25 Suppl 1 ","pages":"e70077"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145131910","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}