Skip to content

Electrical Stimulation for the Treatment of Post-Amputation Pain Using the SPRINT System

A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Pilot Study of the SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System for the Treatment of Post-Amputation Pain

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01996254
Enrollment
28
Registered
2013-11-27
Start date
2013-10-31
Completion date
2019-01-28
Last updated
2020-03-26

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Phantom Limb Pain, Post-Amputation Pain, Residual Limb Pain

Keywords

electrical stimulation, neurostimulation, neuromodulation, post-amputation pain, phantom limb pain, residual limb pain, neuropathic pain, amputee pain

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to determine if electrical stimulation (small levels of electricity) can safely and effectively reduce post-amputation pain. This study involves a device called the SPRINT System. The SPRINT System delivers mild electrical stimulation to nerves in the residual limb. The SPRINT System includes a small wire (called a lead) that is placed through the skin in the upper leg. It also includes a device worn on the body that delivers stimulation (called the SPRINT Stimulator).

Interventions

The SPRINT System is an Investigational Device which delivers mild electrical stimulation to nerves in the residual limb. The SPRINT System includes a small wire (called a Lead) that is placed through the skin in the upper leg. It also includes a device worn on the body that delivers stimulation (called the SPRINT Stimulator).

Sponsors

NDI Medical, LLC
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
United States Department of Defense
CollaboratorFED
SPR Therapeutics, Inc.
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Key Inclusion Criteria: * At least 18 years old * Traumatic lower extremity amputation(s) * Healed amputation and healthy residual limb based upon the investigator's evaluation Key

Exclusion criteria

* Change of prescribed medications affecting pain within the past 4 weeks * Compromised immune system based on medical history * Implanted electronic device * Bleeding disorder * History of valvular heart disease * Confounding central nervous system injuries and disorders * History of recurrent skin infections

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) and Group 2 (Control) Subjects That Achieved ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain in the First 4 Weeks of TreatmentBaseline and Weeks 1-4 Post-Start of TreatmentSubjects completed daily diaries to record their average daily pain intensity scores for each qualifying region of pain (phantom limb pain and/or residual limb pain). These pain intensity questions were excerpted from the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 5 (BPI-5). The BPI-5 is an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. Post-amputation pain intensity scores were determined for each subject by taking the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores from their diaries at Baseline compared to the mean score for the same region(s) of pain reported over 4 weeks after the Start of Treatment (i.e., the average of all diary scores during this period). Subjects that achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their qualifying area(s) of pain were considered successful. Missing diary data were replaced using 1-week BPI-5 recall; if recall scores were unavailable, baseline values were imputed.
Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse Event in Treatment and Control GroupsEach participant enrolled was assessed for adverse events from the time of informed consent through the 12-month follow up visit. The total assessment period was approximately 13 months for each participant.At each study visit following the baseline assessment at Visit 1, subjects were questioned if any changes in their medical status or condition had occurred since their previous visit. If the subject experienced a change that was an adverse event, an Adverse Event Form was completed by the site. The number of subjects that experienced at least one study-related adverse event is reported here.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Subject Satisfaction SurveyVisit 11 (8-weeks post-Start of Treatment (SOT))Subjects completed a sponsor-developed survey with questions pertaining to their feelings about therapy as delivered by the SPRINT Beta Stimulation System as a method for managing chronic post-amputation pain. Subjects were asked to report on their experience using the therapy. Depending on the question, subjects were asked to indicate their agreement with the question (strongly disagree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree), their comfort with the therapy (very uncomfortable, a little bit uncomfortable, fairly comfortable, very comfortable), or when pain relief was felt (immediately, a few minutes later, a few hours later, more than a day later or never). Responses are presented for key groups of questions related to the therapy whereby answer options are considered affirmative for strongly agree/agree, very easy/easy, very comfortable/comfortable.
Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily ActivitiesBaseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOTDegree of post-amputation pain that interfered with 7 aspects of daily life was rated \[scale (0 to 10) with higher scores indicating greater interference\]. The 7 individual scores were averaged to provide an overall pain interference score. Pain interference questions (Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 9) were used for each qualifying area of pain (phantom and/or residual limb pain). Group 1 subjects: baseline average pain interference scores were compared to average pain interference scores for the same region(s) of pain at each monthly interval after the start of therapy. Group 2 subjects: baseline average pain interference scores were compared to their average score at the end of 4 weeks. Proportion of successes (subjects that experienced ≥50% reduction in average pain interference scores) is reported. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported here for ease of data entry and readability.
Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of TreatmentBaseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOTThe Pain Disability Index (PDI) is a validated survey measuring the degree pain disrupts 7 categories of life activities on a scale from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater disability. The 7 scores were summed for each subject to provide an overall pain disability score. For Group 1 subjects, the baseline average PDI score was compared to PDI scores at monthly intervals. For Group 2 subjects, the baseline average PDI score was compared to their PDI score at the end of 4 weeks. The proportion of successes (subjects reporting ≥10 point reduction in PDI scores from baseline) are reported for Group 1 subjects. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported within this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.
Number of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain During Weeks 5-8 Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects During Weeks 1-4Baseline and Weeks 1-8 Post-Start of TreatmentSubjects completed daily diaries to record their average daily pain intensity scores for each qualifying region of pain (phantom limb pain and/or residual limb pain). These pain intensity questions were excerpted from the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 5 (BPI-5) on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as you can imagine. Post-amputation pain intensity scores were determined by taking the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores at baseline and over weeks 5-8 post-start of treatment for Group 1 subjects and over weeks 1-4 post-start of treatment for Group 2 subjects. Subjects that achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their qualifying area(s) of pain were considered successful. Missing diary data were replaced using the bi-weekly BPI-5 recall scores; if unavailable, the BPI-5 recall from the follow-up visit was used. The number of successes in each group is reported.
Change in Opioid Analgesic Usage From BaselineBaseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), and 8-weeks Post-SOTChanges in opioid analgesic usage were calculated using morphine equivalent dosing (MED) for subjects who were using opioid analgesics at baseline. Subjects completed daily diaries in which they tracked their use of analgesic medications. For Group 1 subjects, the mean daily MED from the baseline diary was compared to the mean daily MED during week 4 and week 8. For Group 2 subjects, the daily MED from the baseline diary was compared to the daily MED during week 4 only. The median percent change from baseline is reported. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported within this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.
Percent Change in Hours of Daily Prosthetic UsageBaseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), and 8-weeks Post-SOTSubjects completed daily diaries in which they tracked the number of hours of their prosthetic usage. The 7-day mean prosthetic use was calculated for each subject from their baseline diary and compared to the 7-day mean from week 4 and week 8. The percent change from baseline was then calculated for each subject at each time point (i.e., 4-week median vs. baseline median and 8-week median vs. baseline median). A positive value indicates an increase in prosthetic usage.
Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of TherapyBaseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOTThe Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) is a validated, 21-question survey used to measure depression severity. Question are rated on a scale from 0 to 3, and the scores from each question are totaled to provide an overall score ranging between 0 to 63. Scores from 0-13 indicate minimal depression, 14-19 mild depression, 20-28 moderate depression, and 29-63 severe depression. Group 1 subjects: baseline BDI-II score was compared to BDI-II scores at monthly intervals. Group 2 subjects: baseline BDI-II score was compared to their BDI-II score at the end of 4 weeks. The percent change from baseline to each monthly interval is reported. Certain timepoints for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported within this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.
Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-months Post-SOT, and 12-months Post-SOTSubjects were asked to recall and rate their average pain intensity over the past week (BPI-SF question 5) for each qualifying area of pain (phantom and/or residual limb pain) on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as you can imagine. The average pain intensity score(s) at baseline were compared to the same region(s) of pain at monthly intervals from months 3-12 post-start of treatment (SOT). Subjects that achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their qualifying area(s) of pain were considered successful. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory, but are reported with this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

Recruitment began in 10-2013 (with the first subject enrolling 12-2013) and was concluded in 05-2018. Subjects were screened from a pool of candidates experiencing chronic post-amputation pain.

Pre-assignment details

Participants in the Initial Study Design Arm were only assessed for Safety (Adverse Events).

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)
Treatment Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received electrical stimulation therapy.
12
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)
Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy.
14
Total26

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001FG002
Overall StudyChange in Eligibility020
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up104
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject034

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicGroup 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)TotalGroup 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)
Age, Continuous48.3 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.3
46.5 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.7
45.0 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 13.2
Baseline Beck Depression Inventory Score6.5 units on a scale11.0 units on a scale12.5 units on a scale
Body Mass Index26.5 kg per square meter27.4 kg per square meter30.8 kg per square meter
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
12 Participants25 Participants13 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Location of Amputation
Above Knee
10 Participants15 Participants5 Participants
Location of Amputation
Below Knee
2 Participants11 Participants9 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
1 Participants1 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
11 Participants25 Participants14 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
2 Participants6 Participants4 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
10 Participants20 Participants10 Participants
Side of Amputation
Both Sides (Bilateral)
1 Participants2 Participants1 Participants
Side of Amputation
Left Side
8 Participants14 Participants6 Participants
Side of Amputation
Right Side
3 Participants10 Participants7 Participants
Time Since Amputation5.7 Years5.0 Years4.8 Years

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 50 / 140 / 14
other
Total, other adverse events
0 / 58 / 1410 / 14
serious
Total, serious adverse events
1 / 51 / 141 / 14

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse Event in Treatment and Control Groups

At each study visit following the baseline assessment at Visit 1, subjects were questioned if any changes in their medical status or condition had occurred since their previous visit. If the subject experienced a change that was an adverse event, an Adverse Event Form was completed by the site. The number of subjects that experienced at least one study-related adverse event is reported here.

Time frame: Each participant enrolled was assessed for adverse events from the time of informed consent through the 12-month follow up visit. The total assessment period was approximately 13 months for each participant.

Population: Safety Set: All subjects that underwent Lead placement.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse Event in Treatment and Control Groups0 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse Event in Treatment and Control Groups5 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse Event in Treatment and Control Groups8 Participants
Primary

Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) and Group 2 (Control) Subjects That Achieved ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain in the First 4 Weeks of Treatment

Subjects completed daily diaries to record their average daily pain intensity scores for each qualifying region of pain (phantom limb pain and/or residual limb pain). These pain intensity questions were excerpted from the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 5 (BPI-5). The BPI-5 is an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. Post-amputation pain intensity scores were determined for each subject by taking the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores from their diaries at Baseline compared to the mean score for the same region(s) of pain reported over 4 weeks after the Start of Treatment (i.e., the average of all diary scores during this period). Subjects that achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their qualifying area(s) of pain were considered successful. Missing diary data were replaced using 1-week BPI-5 recall; if recall scores were unavailable, baseline values were imputed.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 1-4 Post-Start of Treatment

Population: Full Analysis Set: Subjects who were consented, randomized, and met all eligibility criteria prior to Lead placement

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) and Group 2 (Control) Subjects That Achieved ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain in the First 4 Weeks of Treatment7 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) and Group 2 (Control) Subjects That Achieved ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain in the First 4 Weeks of Treatment2 Participants
Secondary

Change in Opioid Analgesic Usage From Baseline

Changes in opioid analgesic usage were calculated using morphine equivalent dosing (MED) for subjects who were using opioid analgesics at baseline. Subjects completed daily diaries in which they tracked their use of analgesic medications. For Group 1 subjects, the mean daily MED from the baseline diary was compared to the mean daily MED during week 4 and week 8. For Group 2 subjects, the daily MED from the baseline diary was compared to the daily MED during week 4 only. The median percent change from baseline is reported. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported within this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.

Time frame: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), and 8-weeks Post-SOT

Population: Full Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement. Only the 9 subjects that were using opioid analgesics at baseline were included in the analysis.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Change in Opioid Analgesic Usage From Baseline4-Weeks Post-Start of Treatment32.68 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Change in Opioid Analgesic Usage From Baseline8-Weeks Post-Start of Treatment78.79 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Change in Opioid Analgesic Usage From Baseline4-Weeks Post-Start of Treatment47.17 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Change in Opioid Analgesic Usage From Baseline8-Weeks Post-Start of Treatment45.28 percent change
Secondary

Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy

The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) is a validated, 21-question survey used to measure depression severity. Question are rated on a scale from 0 to 3, and the scores from each question are totaled to provide an overall score ranging between 0 to 63. Scores from 0-13 indicate minimal depression, 14-19 mild depression, 20-28 moderate depression, and 29-63 severe depression. Group 1 subjects: baseline BDI-II score was compared to BDI-II scores at monthly intervals. Group 2 subjects: baseline BDI-II score was compared to their BDI-II score at the end of 4 weeks. The percent change from baseline to each monthly interval is reported. Certain timepoints for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported within this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.

Time frame: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOT

Population: Full Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy7-months Post-Start of Treatment-30.00 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy8-months Post-Start of Treatment-70.00 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy10-months Post-Start of Treatment-65.00 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment-17.69 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy8-weeks Post-Start of Treatment-50.00 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy3-months Post-Start of Treatment-55.00 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy4-months Post-Start of Treatment-75.00 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy5-months Post-Start of Treatment-75.00 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy6-months Post-Start of Treatment-50.00 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy9-months Post-Start of Treatment-68.75 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy11-months Post-Start of Treatment-80.00 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy12-months Post-Start of Treatment0.00 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy11-months Post-Start of Treatment-69.85 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy7-months Post-Start of Treatment11.76 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy4-months Post-Start of Treatment-35.29 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy8-months Post-Start of Treatment-41.18 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy9-months Post-Start of Treatment-17.65 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy10-months Post-Start of Treatment-67.65 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy5-months Post-Start of Treatment-47.06 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment-11.76 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy12-months Post-Start of Treatment-72.79 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy8-weeks Post-Start of Treatment-15.38 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy6-months Post-Start of Treatment22.22 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy3-months Post-Start of Treatment-10.00 percent change
Secondary

Number of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain During Weeks 5-8 Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects During Weeks 1-4

Subjects completed daily diaries to record their average daily pain intensity scores for each qualifying region of pain (phantom limb pain and/or residual limb pain). These pain intensity questions were excerpted from the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 5 (BPI-5) on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as you can imagine. Post-amputation pain intensity scores were determined by taking the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores at baseline and over weeks 5-8 post-start of treatment for Group 1 subjects and over weeks 1-4 post-start of treatment for Group 2 subjects. Subjects that achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their qualifying area(s) of pain were considered successful. Missing diary data were replaced using the bi-weekly BPI-5 recall scores; if unavailable, the BPI-5 recall from the follow-up visit was used. The number of successes in each group is reported.

Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 1-8 Post-Start of Treatment

Population: Full Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Number of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain During Weeks 5-8 Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects During Weeks 1-48 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Number of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain During Weeks 5-8 Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects During Weeks 1-42 Participants
Secondary

Percent Change in Hours of Daily Prosthetic Usage

Subjects completed daily diaries in which they tracked the number of hours of their prosthetic usage. The 7-day mean prosthetic use was calculated for each subject from their baseline diary and compared to the 7-day mean from week 4 and week 8. The percent change from baseline was then calculated for each subject at each time point (i.e., 4-week median vs. baseline median and 8-week median vs. baseline median). A positive value indicates an increase in prosthetic usage.

Time frame: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), and 8-weeks Post-SOT

Population: Full Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEDIAN)
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Percent Change in Hours of Daily Prosthetic Usage4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment2.49 percent change
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Percent Change in Hours of Daily Prosthetic Usage8-weeks Post-Start of Treatment3.23 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Percent Change in Hours of Daily Prosthetic Usage8-weeks Post-Start of Treatment9.14 percent change
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Percent Change in Hours of Daily Prosthetic Usage4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment4.51 percent change
Secondary

Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment

The Pain Disability Index (PDI) is a validated survey measuring the degree pain disrupts 7 categories of life activities on a scale from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater disability. The 7 scores were summed for each subject to provide an overall pain disability score. For Group 1 subjects, the baseline average PDI score was compared to PDI scores at monthly intervals. For Group 2 subjects, the baseline average PDI score was compared to their PDI score at the end of 4 weeks. The proportion of successes (subjects reporting ≥10 point reduction in PDI scores from baseline) are reported for Group 1 subjects. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported within this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.

Time frame: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOT

Population: Full Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment8-weeks Post-Start of Treatment8 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment7-months Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment4-months Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment8-months Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment5-months Post-Start of Treatment7 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment10-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment3-months Post-Start of Treatment7 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment11-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment6-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment12-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment9-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment12-months Post-Start of Treatment3 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment10 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment8-weeks Post-Start of Treatment9 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment3-months Post-Start of Treatment7 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment4-months Post-Start of Treatment7 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment5-months Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment6-months Post-Start of Treatment4 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment7-months Post-Start of Treatment4 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment8-months Post-Start of Treatment4 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment9-months Post-Start of Treatment4 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment10-months Post-Start of Treatment4 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment11-months Post-Start of Treatment4 Participants
Secondary

Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment

Subjects were asked to recall and rate their average pain intensity over the past week (BPI-SF question 5) for each qualifying area of pain (phantom and/or residual limb pain) on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as you can imagine. The average pain intensity score(s) at baseline were compared to the same region(s) of pain at monthly intervals from months 3-12 post-start of treatment (SOT). Subjects that achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their qualifying area(s) of pain were considered successful. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory, but are reported with this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.

Time frame: 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-months Post-SOT, and 12-months Post-SOT

Population: Long Term Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement with imputed data for missed visits. Covarities in the imputation model included age, gender, ethnicity, race, time since amputation, location of amputation, and baseline average pain intensity score(s).

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment3-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment7-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment9-months Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment4-months Post-Start of Treatment7 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment10-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment8-months Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment11-months Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment5-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment12-months Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment6-months Post-Start of Treatment4 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment12-months Post-Start of Treatment1 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment6-months Post-Start of Treatment0 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment7-months Post-Start of Treatment0 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment3-months Post-Start of Treatment0 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment4-months Post-Start of Treatment1 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment5-months Post-Start of Treatment0 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment8-months Post-Start of Treatment0 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment9-months Post-Start of Treatment0 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment10-months Post-Start of Treatment0 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment11-months Post-Start of Treatment0 Participants
Secondary

Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities

Degree of post-amputation pain that interfered with 7 aspects of daily life was rated \[scale (0 to 10) with higher scores indicating greater interference\]. The 7 individual scores were averaged to provide an overall pain interference score. Pain interference questions (Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 9) were used for each qualifying area of pain (phantom and/or residual limb pain). Group 1 subjects: baseline average pain interference scores were compared to average pain interference scores for the same region(s) of pain at each monthly interval after the start of therapy. Group 2 subjects: baseline average pain interference scores were compared to their average score at the end of 4 weeks. Proportion of successes (subjects that experienced ≥50% reduction in average pain interference scores) is reported. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported here for ease of data entry and readability.

Time frame: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOT

Population: Long Term Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement with imputed data for missed visits. Covarities in the imputation model included age, gender, ethnicity, race, time since amputation, location of amputation, and baseline average pain intensity score(s).

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities9-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities8-weeks Post-Start of Treatment9 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities11-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities3-months Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities8-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities4-months Post-Start of Treatment7 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities12-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities10-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities6-months Post-Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities7-months Post-Start of Treatment6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities5-months Post-Start of Treatment7 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities7-months Post-Start of Treatment2 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities8-months Post-Start of Treatment0 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities9-months Post-Start of Treatment0 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities10-months Post-Start of Treatment2 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities11-months Post-Start of Treatment2 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities12-months Post-Start of Treatment2 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment2 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities8-weeks Post-Start of Treatment2 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities3-months Post-Start of Treatment2 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities4-months Post-Start of Treatment4 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities5-months Post-Start of Treatment2 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities6-months Post-Start of Treatment2 Participants
Secondary

Subject Satisfaction Survey

Subjects completed a sponsor-developed survey with questions pertaining to their feelings about therapy as delivered by the SPRINT Beta Stimulation System as a method for managing chronic post-amputation pain. Subjects were asked to report on their experience using the therapy. Depending on the question, subjects were asked to indicate their agreement with the question (strongly disagree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree), their comfort with the therapy (very uncomfortable, a little bit uncomfortable, fairly comfortable, very comfortable), or when pain relief was felt (immediately, a few minutes later, a few hours later, more than a day later or never). Responses are presented for key groups of questions related to the therapy whereby answer options are considered affirmative for strongly agree/agree, very easy/easy, very comfortable/comfortable.

Time frame: Visit 11 (8-weeks post-Start of Treatment (SOT))

Population: Of the 28 total subjects, 14 subjects that used one version of the stimulator (Sprint Beta) were asked to complete subject surveys and 6 of the 14 responded. Results are presented for the 6 surveys.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyPain relief (w/stim) immediate/within a few hours3 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyStimulation felt comfortable/soothing/tolerable3 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyPrefer stimulation to pain medications3 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyWould recommend therapy3 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyTolerated lead placement w/some or no discomfort3 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyWould like to have used stimulation longer3 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyTolerated lead placement w/some or no discomfort3 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyPain relief (w/stim) immediate/within a few hours3 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyWould recommend therapy2 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyStimulation felt comfortable/soothing/tolerable3 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyWould like to have used stimulation longer2 Participants
Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design)Subject Satisfaction SurveyPrefer stimulation to pain medications3 Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 21, 2026