选择植入式脉冲发生器用于深部脑刺激:临床实践综述。

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Yara Rosalie Willems, Niels Anthony van der Gaag, Kuan Hua Kho, Øystein Vesterli Tveiten, Marie Therese Krüger, Martin Jakobs
{"title":"选择植入式脉冲发生器用于深部脑刺激:临床实践综述。","authors":"Yara Rosalie Willems,&nbsp;Niels Anthony van der Gaag,&nbsp;Kuan Hua Kho,&nbsp;Øystein Vesterli Tveiten,&nbsp;Marie Therese Krüger,&nbsp;Martin Jakobs","doi":"10.1159/000529495","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The success of deep brain stimulation (DBS) treatment depends on several factors, including proper patient selection, accurate electrode placement, and adequate stimulation settings. Another factor that may impact long-term satisfaction and therapy outcomes is the type of implantable pulse generator (IPG) used: rechargeable or non-rechargeable. However, there are currently no guidelines on the choice of IPG type. The present study investigates the current practices, opinions, and factors DBS clinicians consider when choosing an IPG for their patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between December 2021 and June 2022, we sent a structured questionnaire with 42 questions to DBS experts of two international, functional neurosurgery societies. The questionnaire included a rating scale where participants could rate the factors influencing their choice of IPG type and their satisfaction with certain IPG aspects. Additionally, we presented four clinical case scenarios to assess preference of choice of IPG-type in each case.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-seven participants from 30 different countries completed the questionnaire. The three most relevant factors for IPG choice were \"existing social support,\" \"cognitive status,\" and \"patient age.\" Most participants believed that patients valued avoiding repetitive replacement surgeries more than the burden of regularly recharging the IPG. Participants reported that they implanted the same amount of rechargeable as non-rechargeable IPGs for primary DBS insertions and 20% converted non-rechargeable to rechargeable IPGs during IPG replacements. Most participants estimated that rechargeable was the more cost-effective option.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This present study shows that the decision-making of the choice of IPG is very individualized. We identified the key factors influencing the physician's choice of IPG. Compared to patient-centric studies, clinicians may value different aspects. Therefore, clinicians should rely not only on their opinion but also counsel patients on different types of IPGs and consider the patient's preferences. Uniform global guidelines on IPG choice may not represent regional or national differences in the healthcare systems.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Choice of Implantable Pulse Generators for Deep Brain Stimulation: An Overview of Clinical Practice.\",\"authors\":\"Yara Rosalie Willems,&nbsp;Niels Anthony van der Gaag,&nbsp;Kuan Hua Kho,&nbsp;Øystein Vesterli Tveiten,&nbsp;Marie Therese Krüger,&nbsp;Martin Jakobs\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000529495\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The success of deep brain stimulation (DBS) treatment depends on several factors, including proper patient selection, accurate electrode placement, and adequate stimulation settings. Another factor that may impact long-term satisfaction and therapy outcomes is the type of implantable pulse generator (IPG) used: rechargeable or non-rechargeable. However, there are currently no guidelines on the choice of IPG type. The present study investigates the current practices, opinions, and factors DBS clinicians consider when choosing an IPG for their patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Between December 2021 and June 2022, we sent a structured questionnaire with 42 questions to DBS experts of two international, functional neurosurgery societies. The questionnaire included a rating scale where participants could rate the factors influencing their choice of IPG type and their satisfaction with certain IPG aspects. Additionally, we presented four clinical case scenarios to assess preference of choice of IPG-type in each case.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-seven participants from 30 different countries completed the questionnaire. The three most relevant factors for IPG choice were \\\"existing social support,\\\" \\\"cognitive status,\\\" and \\\"patient age.\\\" Most participants believed that patients valued avoiding repetitive replacement surgeries more than the burden of regularly recharging the IPG. Participants reported that they implanted the same amount of rechargeable as non-rechargeable IPGs for primary DBS insertions and 20% converted non-rechargeable to rechargeable IPGs during IPG replacements. Most participants estimated that rechargeable was the more cost-effective option.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This present study shows that the decision-making of the choice of IPG is very individualized. We identified the key factors influencing the physician's choice of IPG. Compared to patient-centric studies, clinicians may value different aspects. Therefore, clinicians should rely not only on their opinion but also counsel patients on different types of IPGs and consider the patient's preferences. Uniform global guidelines on IPG choice may not represent regional or national differences in the healthcare systems.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000529495\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000529495","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

脑深部电刺激(DBS)治疗的成功取决于几个因素,包括正确的患者选择、准确的电极放置和适当的刺激设置。另一个可能影响长期满意度和治疗结果的因素是所使用的植入式脉冲发生器(IPG)的类型:可充电或不可充电。然而,目前还没有关于IPG类型选择的指南。本研究调查了DBS临床医生在为患者选择IPG时考虑的当前实践、观点和因素。方法:在2021年12月至2022年6月期间,我们向两个国际功能神经外科学会的DBS专家发送了一份包含42个问题的结构化问卷。问卷包括一个评分量表,参与者可以对影响他们选择IPG类型的因素和他们对IPG某些方面的满意度进行评分。此外,我们提出了四个临床案例来评估在每个案例中对ipg类型的偏好选择。结果:来自30个不同国家的87名参与者完成了问卷调查。选择IPG的三个最相关因素是“现有的社会支持”、“认知状态”和“患者年龄”。大多数参与者认为,患者更重视避免重复的替代手术,而不是定期给IPG充电的负担。参与者报告说,他们在首次DBS插入时植入了相同数量的可充电IPG和不可充电IPG, 20%的人在IPG更换期间将不可充电IPG转换为可充电IPG。大多数与会者估计,可充电电池是更具成本效益的选择。结论:本研究显示IPG的选择决策具有很强的个体化。我们确定了影响医生选择IPG的关键因素。与以患者为中心的研究相比,临床医生可能看重不同的方面。因此,临床医生不仅要依靠自己的意见,还要就不同类型的IPGs向患者提出建议,并考虑患者的偏好。关于IPG选择的统一的全球指南可能不能代表医疗保健系统的区域或国家差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Choice of Implantable Pulse Generators for Deep Brain Stimulation: An Overview of Clinical Practice.

Introduction: The success of deep brain stimulation (DBS) treatment depends on several factors, including proper patient selection, accurate electrode placement, and adequate stimulation settings. Another factor that may impact long-term satisfaction and therapy outcomes is the type of implantable pulse generator (IPG) used: rechargeable or non-rechargeable. However, there are currently no guidelines on the choice of IPG type. The present study investigates the current practices, opinions, and factors DBS clinicians consider when choosing an IPG for their patients.

Methods: Between December 2021 and June 2022, we sent a structured questionnaire with 42 questions to DBS experts of two international, functional neurosurgery societies. The questionnaire included a rating scale where participants could rate the factors influencing their choice of IPG type and their satisfaction with certain IPG aspects. Additionally, we presented four clinical case scenarios to assess preference of choice of IPG-type in each case.

Results: Eighty-seven participants from 30 different countries completed the questionnaire. The three most relevant factors for IPG choice were "existing social support," "cognitive status," and "patient age." Most participants believed that patients valued avoiding repetitive replacement surgeries more than the burden of regularly recharging the IPG. Participants reported that they implanted the same amount of rechargeable as non-rechargeable IPGs for primary DBS insertions and 20% converted non-rechargeable to rechargeable IPGs during IPG replacements. Most participants estimated that rechargeable was the more cost-effective option.

Conclusion: This present study shows that the decision-making of the choice of IPG is very individualized. We identified the key factors influencing the physician's choice of IPG. Compared to patient-centric studies, clinicians may value different aspects. Therefore, clinicians should rely not only on their opinion but also counsel patients on different types of IPGs and consider the patient's preferences. Uniform global guidelines on IPG choice may not represent regional or national differences in the healthcare systems.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信