Psychological Screening/Phenotyping as Predictors for Spinal Cord Stimulation

被引:0
|
作者
Claudia M. Campbell
Robert N. Jamison
Robert R. Edwards
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine,Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences
[2] Brigham and Women’s Hospital,undefined
[3] Harvard Medical School,undefined
[4] Pain Management Center,undefined
来源
关键词
Spinal cord stimulation; Psychological assessment; QST; Pain testing;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Spinal cord stimulation (SCS) is becoming a widely used treatment for a number of pain conditions and is frequently considered as a pain management option when conservative or less invasive techniques have proven to be ineffective. Potential indications for SCS include complex regional pain syndrome (CRPS), postherpetic neuralgia, traumatic nerve injury, failed back surgery syndrome, refractory angina pectoris, peripheral vascular disease, neuropathic pain, and visceral pain (Guttman et al. Pain Pract. 9:308–11, 2009). While research on SCS is in its infancy, it is clear that substantial variation exists in the degree of benefit obtained from SCS, and the procedure does not come without risks; thus focused patient selection is becoming very important. Psychological characteristics play an important role in shaping individual differences in the pain experience and may influence responses to SCS, as well as a variety of other pain treatments (Doleys Neurosurg Focus 21:E1, 2006). In addition to psychological assessment, quantitative sensory testing (QST) procedures offer another valuable resource in forecasting who may benefit most from SCS and may also shed light on mechanisms underlying the individual characteristics promoting the effectiveness of such procedures (Eisenberg et al. Pain Pract. 6:161–165, 2006). Here, we present a brief overview of recent studies examining these factors in their relationship with SCS outcomes.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] The Potential of Spinal Cord Stimulation in Treating Spinal Cord Injury
    Eli Justin Forouzan
    Mohammed Yousif Rashid
    Ned F. Nasr
    Alaa Abd-Elsayed
    Nebojsa Nick Knezevic
    Current Pain and Headache Reports, 2025, 29 (1)
  • [22] Acute vs. prolonged screening for spinal cord stimulation in chronic pain
    Weinand, ME
    Madhusudan, H
    Davis, B
    Melgar, M
    NEUROMODULATION, 2003, 6 (01): : 15 - 19
  • [23] Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Review
    Compton, Aaron K.
    Shah, Binit
    Hayek, Salim M.
    CURRENT PAIN AND HEADACHE REPORTS, 2012, 16 (01) : 35 - 42
  • [24] Attrition with spinal cord stimulation
    Mann, Stacey A.
    Sparkes, Elizabeth
    Duarte, Rui V.
    Raphael, Jon H.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 2015, 29 (06) : 823 - 828
  • [25] Spinal Cord Stimulation: A Review
    Aaron K. Compton
    Binit Shah
    Salim M. Hayek
    Current Pain and Headache Reports, 2012, 16 : 35 - 42
  • [26] Spinal cord stimulation revisited
    Segal, R
    Stacey, BR
    Rudy, TE
    Baser, S
    Markham, J
    NEUROLOGICAL RESEARCH, 1998, 20 (05) : 391 - 396
  • [27] Spinal cord stimulation for angina
    Acland, RH
    MacFarlane, MR
    Sandom, JJ
    NEW ZEALAND MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2001, 114 (1137) : 366 - 366
  • [28] Spinal cord stimulation for pain
    Simpson, BA
    Proceedings of the 7th INS - Meeting of the International Neuromodulation Society, 2005, : 55 - 59
  • [29] SPINAL-CORD STIMULATION
    ILLIS, LS
    SEDGWICK, EM
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF HOSPITAL MEDICINE, 1978, 20 (06): : 682 - 687
  • [30] SPINAL-CORD STIMULATION
    PAWL, RP
    CLINICAL JOURNAL OF PAIN, 1991, 7 (03): : 253 - 254