Skip to content

Deep Brain Stimulation (DBS) for the Suppression of Tremor

A Clinical Evaluation of the Advanced Neuromodulation System (ANS) Totally Implantable Deep Brain Stimulation System for the Suppression of Tremor in the Upper Extremities of Patients With Essential Tremor.

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02087046
Enrollment
127
Registered
2014-03-14
Start date
2005-10-31
Completion date
2017-12-31
Last updated
2023-04-25

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

Conditions

Action Tremor, Essential Tremor, Tremor, Tremor, Limb

Brief summary

The purpose of the proposed study is to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the ANS Totally Implantable Deep Brain Stimulation System in the VIM nucleus of the thalamus implanted for the treatment of tremor due to essential tremor. This study will be included in the Pre-Market Approval Application to support the safety of this device in use.

Detailed description

This study is designed as a prospective, multi-centered study for 365 days in duration from device implantation. A maximum of 12 sites will enroll 160 patients. Each patient will be screened and then undergo a baseline evaluation followed by unilateral or bilateral implantation of the DBS system. During the implantation procedure, each patient will undergo a trial of stimulation in the operating room. The device may be internalized after a successful intra-operative trial or at a later surgery (no later than 4 weeks after initial lead placement). If the device is not activated immediately postsurgery, the patient may return to the clinic to determine optimum stimulation programming. Device programming will be optimized in as many visits as necessary following implantation. The day that the device is fully implanted will be classified as Day 0 for each patient. After Day 0 the patient will return to clinic for evaluations at, Day 90 (±14 days), and Day 180 (±14 days) and Day 365 (approximately 12 months ± 30 days after Day 0). These evaluations consist of the CRST, the QUEST, the SF36, Patient and caregiver Global Ratings and the Patient Satisfaction Rating. At Baseline and Day 180, the CRST evaluation session will be video recorded for analysis by an independent evaluator unaware of the functioning of the device. Additionally, at the Day 180 visit, the physician will have the option to provide the patient with amplitude control. A comparison of measures within the same person from pre-treatment to post-treatment will be performed. Also, pre-treatment and post-treatment group means and standard deviations will be determined. Patients completed follow-up visits as part of the original protocol (C-04-02) for one year (or in some cases longer if patient was bilaterally implanted) and continued to complete additional visits as part of the Long-Term Follow-up protocol (C-06-03) for up to 5 years post implant.

Interventions

DEVICEANS Totally Implantable Deep Brain Stimulation System

ANS Totally Implantable Deep Brain Stimulation System will be implanted in the VIM nucleus of the thalamus

Sponsors

Abbott Medical Devices
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

1. Patient or authorized representative has signed an informed consent. 2. Patient is over 18 years of age. 3. Patient is diagnosed with essential tremor for at least 3 years. 4. Patient has a disabling medical-refractory upper extremity tremor with no evidence of supraspinal central nervous system disease or injury (tremor not adequately controlled by medications for at least three (3) months before implant). 5. Patient has a postural or kinetic tremor severity score of at least 3 out of 4 in the extremity intended for treatment on the Fahn-Tolosa-Marin Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor. 6. Patient will maintain a constant dose of anti-tremor medication indicated as best medical management for one (1) month prior to enrollment in study. 7. Patient is available for appropriate follow-up times for the length of the study.

Exclusion criteria

1. Patient is not surgical candidate; 2. Patient has other clinically or medically significant disease; 3. Patient has any neurological injury or disease other than essential tremor; 4. Patient has any condition requiring repeated MRI scans; 5. Patient has any condition requiring diathermy; 6. Patients on anticoagulant medications; 7. Patient has untreated clinically significant depression; 8. Patient has had an electrical or electromagnetic implant (cochlear prosthesis, pacemaker etc); 9. Patient has had a prior thalamotomy or surgical ablation procedure in either side of the brain; 10. Patient has dementia interfering with their ability to co-operate or comply with study requirements or comprehend the informed consent (mini-mental exam score \<24); 11. Patient abuses drugs or alcohol; 12. Patient has had botulinum toxin injections in the six (6) months prior to enrollment; 13. Patient has a history of cranial surgery; 14. Patient has a history of seizures; 15. Patient has any metallic implants that may interfere with the functioning of the device (e.g. aneurysm clips); 16. Patient has a history of stimulation intolerance in any area of the body; 17. Patient is a female of child bearing potential with a positive urine pregnancy test or not using adequate contraception.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Primary Efficacy Endpoint: Difference in the Postural Tremor Score of the Target Limb Between Stimulation On and Stimulation Off, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerDay 180The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms.
Primary Safety Endpoint: Percentage of Participants With Device-related or Procedure Related Adverse EventsWithin 180 days following the initial implantPercentage of device-related or procedure related adverse events will be assessed within 6 months following the initial unilateral implant. All such adverse events will be counted for 180 days following surgery or until the day of the second implant, which ever comes first.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBaselineThe Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's handwriting according to the CRST (scale 0-4).
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerDay 180The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The blind reviewer will evaluate the patient's handwriting according to the CRST (scale 0-4).
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBaselineThe Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's pouring ability according to the CRST
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianDay 90The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's pouring ability according to the CRST
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Pouring Ability From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerDay 180The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The blind reviewer will evaluate the patient's pouring ability according to the CRST
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBaselineThe Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The motor score adds together all responses to the tremor assessment for questions 1-9 of the CRST (whether or not the specific side is being treated).
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBaselineThe Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The activity of daily living score adds together all responses to questions 15-21 of the CRST.
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Bilateral Stimulation, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBaselineThe Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. For those patients that had bilateral stimulation, the site physician will evaluate the patient's non-target side after 180 days of bilateral stimulation.
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Non-Target Limb Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBaselineThe Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. For those patients that had bilateral stimulation, the site physician will evaluate the patient's non-target side after 180 days with only the second side system On
Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary IndexBaselineThe QUEST questionnaire consists of 30 items, which are rated from 0 to 4, corresponding to the frequency (from never to always). Those 30 items assess how tremor impacts a function or how it can be associated with feelings or attitudes. The 30 items contribute to five sub scales (number of items contributing to each scale in parentheses): Physical/ADL (9), Psychosocial (9), Communication (3), Hobbies/Leisure (3), and Work/Finances (6). The score on each sub scale is expressed as a percentage of the total score possible, with a higher score indicating greater dissatisfaction with that domain of QOL. As the scores were expressed as percentages, if a question was unanswered it was excluded and percentages were calculated based on the remaining answers. A total or quest summary index (QSI) was computed by calculating the mean of the five scales. Maximal score of 100 indicates worse quality of life, while minimal score 0 corresponds to best quality of life.
Change From Baseline for Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary IndexDay 90The QUEST questionnaire consists of 30 items, which are rated from 0 to 4, corresponding to the frequency (from never to always). Those 30 items assess how tremor impacts a function or how it can be associated with feelings or attitudes. The 30 items contribute to five sub scales (number of items contributing to each scale in parentheses): Physical/ADL (9), Psychosocial (9), Communication (3), Hobbies/Leisure (3), and Work/Finances (6). The score on each sub scale is expressed as a percentage of the total score possible, with a higher score indicating greater dissatisfaction with that domain of QOL. As the scores were expressed as percentages, if a question was unanswered it was excluded and percentages were calculated based on the remaining answers. A total or quest summary index (QSI) was computed by calculating the mean of the five scales. Maximal score of 100 indicates worse quality of life, while minimal score 0 corresponds to best quality of life.
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBaselineThe Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms.
Global Assessment Scores by ExaminerBaselineGlobal outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire that measures a global assessment of the patient quality of life and the examiner's interpretation of the patient's quality of life.
Global Assessment by CaregiverBaselineGlobal outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire that measures a global assessment of the patient quality of life and the caregiver's interpretation of the patient's quality of life
Global Assessment by PatientBaselineGlobal outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire in which patients assess their own global outcome at each visit
Subjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemDay 90Subjective assessment includes changes in their ET symptoms since the last visit indicated as marked improvement, moderate improvement, mild improvement, worsening, or no change.
Number of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsDay 90At each visit, patients will be asked about their satisfaction with the DBS system's functioning and ability to control symptoms
Number of Participants Who Would Choose to Receive the DBS System AgainDay 90At each visit, patients will be asked if they would undergo the DBS procedure again
Number of Participants Who Would Recommend the DBS SystemDay 90At each visit, patients will be asked if they would recommend the DBS system to others
Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI - II) Score for Depression SymptomsBaselineThe Beck Depression Inventory II is A clinical rating scale designed for detecting depression based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders-Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria. This widely used instrument consists of 21 items to assess the intensity of depression in clinical and normal patients. Each item is a list of four statements arranged in increasing severity about a particular symptom of depression. The BDI II questionnaire contains 21 questions, each answer being scored on a scale value of 0 to 3. A score between 0-13 indicates minimal depression, 14-19 mild depression, 20-28 moderate depression and 29-63 severe depression. Total scores are obtained by computing the sum of each score. The scores range from 0 to 63, with higher score indicating greater severity of depressive symptoms.
Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI - II) Score for Depression SymptomsDay 365The Beck Depression Inventory II is A clinical rating scale designed for detecting depression based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders-Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria. This widely used instrument consists of 21 items to assess the intensity of depression in clinical and normal patients. Each item is a list of four statements arranged in increasing severity about a particular symptom of depression. The BDI II questionnaire contains 21 questions, each answer being scored on a scale value of 0 to 3. A score between 0-13 indicates minimal depression, 14-19 mild depression, 20-28 moderate depression and 29-63 severe depression. Total scores are obtained by computing the sum of each score. The scores range from 0 to 63, with higher score indicating greater severity of depressive symptoms.
Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) for Examination of Mental StatusBaselineThe Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is a 30-point questionnaire that is used extensively in clinical and research settings to measure cognitive impairment. It examines functions including registration (repeating named prompts), attention and calculation, recall, language, ability to follow simple commands and orientation. Any score of 24 or more (out of 30) indicates a normal cognition.
Change From Baseline in Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) For Examination of Mental StatusDay 365The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is a 30-point questionnaire that is used extensively in clinical and research settings to measure cognitive impairment. It examines functions including registration (repeating named prompts), attention and calculation, recall, language, ability to follow simple commands and orientation. Any score of 24 or more (out of 30) indicates a normal cognition.
SF36 Components and Individual DomainsBaselineThe SF-36 questionnaire is a measure of health status with 36 items across 8 domains. The eight domains are separated into two summary scores of four domains, the physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). The SF-36 score is transformed into a scale of 0-100, with 100 indicating no disability. PCS and MCS are scaled in comparison to population norms to reflect a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 for the general population of the United States.
Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Target Limb Responder Analysis, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianDay 90The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. During responder analysis, a 2-point reduction in kinetic tremor or postural tremor between stimulation Off and stimulation On show an improvement in activities of daily living was considered a response, was also performed using the site physician's ratings.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

A total of 127 patients were enrolled from 12 investigational sites and implanted with the study device. The first patient was implanted with the SJM DBS Systems on 21 October, 2005. Of the 127 implanted subjects, 80 received unilateral implants and the remaining 47 patients received bilateral implants.

Pre-assignment details

Of the 150 subjects who were screened, 23 subjects were excluded from implantation due to inclusion or exclusion criteria, or the patient's decision to discontinue before surgery.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Stimulation
ANS Totally Implantable Deep BrainStimulation System: ANS Totally Implantable Deep BrainStimulation System will be implanted in the VIM nucleus of the thalamus
127
Total127

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000
Overall StudyAdverse Event4
Overall StudyDeath1
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up3
Overall StudyPhysician Decision1
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject2

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicStimulation
Age, Continuous64.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.6
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
African American
1 participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Caucasian
124 participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Hispanic
2 participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
127 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
58 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
69 Participants
Years since initial diagnosis of ET14.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.8
Years since onset of tremor29.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 17.4

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
3 / 127
other
Total, other adverse events
91 / 127
serious
Total, serious adverse events
28 / 127

Outcome results

Primary

Primary Efficacy Endpoint: Difference in the Postural Tremor Score of the Target Limb Between Stimulation On and Stimulation Off, As Assessed by the Blind Reviewer

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms.

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationPrimary Efficacy Endpoint: Difference in the Postural Tremor Score of the Target Limb Between Stimulation On and Stimulation Off, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerStimulation Off2.09 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.07
StimulationPrimary Efficacy Endpoint: Difference in the Postural Tremor Score of the Target Limb Between Stimulation On and Stimulation Off, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerStimulation On0.84 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.83
StimulationPrimary Efficacy Endpoint: Difference in the Postural Tremor Score of the Target Limb Between Stimulation On and Stimulation Off, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerMean Difference-1.25 units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.26
Primary

Primary Safety Endpoint: Percentage of Participants With Device-related or Procedure Related Adverse Events

Percentage of device-related or procedure related adverse events will be assessed within 6 months following the initial unilateral implant. All such adverse events will be counted for 180 days following surgery or until the day of the second implant, which ever comes first.

Time frame: Within 180 days following the initial implant

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
StimulationPrimary Safety Endpoint: Percentage of Participants With Device-related or Procedure Related Adverse Events31.5 percentage of participants
Secondary

Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI - II) Score for Depression Symptoms

The Beck Depression Inventory II is A clinical rating scale designed for detecting depression based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders-Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria. This widely used instrument consists of 21 items to assess the intensity of depression in clinical and normal patients. Each item is a list of four statements arranged in increasing severity about a particular symptom of depression. The BDI II questionnaire contains 21 questions, each answer being scored on a scale value of 0 to 3. A score between 0-13 indicates minimal depression, 14-19 mild depression, 20-28 moderate depression and 29-63 severe depression. Total scores are obtained by computing the sum of each score. The scores range from 0 to 63, with higher score indicating greater severity of depressive symptoms.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationBeck Depression Inventory II (BDI - II) Score for Depression Symptoms8.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.6
Secondary

Change From Baseline for Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary Index

The QUEST questionnaire consists of 30 items, which are rated from 0 to 4, corresponding to the frequency (from never to always). Those 30 items assess how tremor impacts a function or how it can be associated with feelings or attitudes. The 30 items contribute to five sub scales (number of items contributing to each scale in parentheses): Physical/ADL (9), Psychosocial (9), Communication (3), Hobbies/Leisure (3), and Work/Finances (6). The score on each sub scale is expressed as a percentage of the total score possible, with a higher score indicating greater dissatisfaction with that domain of QOL. As the scores were expressed as percentages, if a question was unanswered it was excluded and percentages were calculated based on the remaining answers. A total or quest summary index (QSI) was computed by calculating the mean of the five scales. Maximal score of 100 indicates worse quality of life, while minimal score 0 corresponds to best quality of life.

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationChange From Baseline for Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary IndexSummary Index Mean33.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.8
StimulationChange From Baseline for Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary IndexMean Change in Summary Index-16.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.5
Secondary

Change From Baseline for Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary Index

The QUEST questionnaire consists of 30 items, which are rated from 0 to 4, corresponding to the frequency (from never to always). Those 30 items assess how tremor impacts a function or how it can be associated with feelings or attitudes. The 30 items contribute to five sub scales (number of items contributing to each scale in parentheses): Physical/ADL (9), Psychosocial (9), Communication (3), Hobbies/Leisure (3), and Work/Finances (6). The score on each sub scale is expressed as a percentage of the total score possible, with a higher score indicating greater dissatisfaction with that domain of QOL. As the scores were expressed as percentages, if a question was unanswered it was excluded and percentages were calculated based on the remaining answers. A total or quest summary index (QSI) was computed by calculating the mean of the five scales. Maximal score of 100 indicates worse quality of life, while minimal score 0 corresponds to best quality of life.

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationChange From Baseline for Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary IndexMean Change in Summary Index-15.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.9
StimulationChange From Baseline for Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary IndexSummary Index Mean33.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.2
Secondary

Change From Baseline for Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary Index

The QUEST questionnaire consists of 30 items, which are rated from 0 to 4, corresponding to the frequency (from never to always). Those 30 items assess how tremor impacts a function or how it can be associated with feelings or attitudes. The 30 items contribute to five sub scales (number of items contributing to each scale in parentheses): Physical/ADL (9), Psychosocial (9), Communication (3), Hobbies/Leisure (3), and Work/Finances (6). The score on each sub scale is expressed as a percentage of the total score possible, with a higher score indicating greater dissatisfaction with that domain of QOL. As the scores were expressed as percentages, if a question was unanswered it was excluded and percentages were calculated based on the remaining answers. A total or quest summary index (QSI) was computed by calculating the mean of the five scales. Maximal score of 100 indicates worse quality of life, while minimal score 0 corresponds to best quality of life.

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationChange From Baseline for Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary IndexSummary Index30.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.4
StimulationChange From Baseline for Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary IndexMean Change in Summary Index-18.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.4
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI - II) Score for Depression Symptoms

The Beck Depression Inventory II is A clinical rating scale designed for detecting depression based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Health Disorders-Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria. This widely used instrument consists of 21 items to assess the intensity of depression in clinical and normal patients. Each item is a list of four statements arranged in increasing severity about a particular symptom of depression. The BDI II questionnaire contains 21 questions, each answer being scored on a scale value of 0 to 3. A score between 0-13 indicates minimal depression, 14-19 mild depression, 20-28 moderate depression and 29-63 severe depression. Total scores are obtained by computing the sum of each score. The scores range from 0 to 63, with higher score indicating greater severity of depressive symptoms.

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationChange From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI - II) Score for Depression SymptomsMean Score6.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.1
StimulationChange From Baseline in Beck Depression Inventory II (BDI - II) Score for Depression SymptomsMean Change in Score-2.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.3
Secondary

Change From Baseline in Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) For Examination of Mental Status

The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is a 30-point questionnaire that is used extensively in clinical and research settings to measure cognitive impairment. It examines functions including registration (repeating named prompts), attention and calculation, recall, language, ability to follow simple commands and orientation. Any score of 24 or more (out of 30) indicates a normal cognition.

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationChange From Baseline in Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) For Examination of Mental StatusMean Score29.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.4
StimulationChange From Baseline in Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) For Examination of Mental StatusMean Change in Score-0.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The activity of daily living score adds together all responses to questions 15-21 of the CRST.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician16.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.9
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The activity of daily living score adds together all responses to questions 15-21 of the CRST.

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off14.7 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.5
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On4.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.7
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-10.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.4
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The activity of daily living score adds together all responses to questions 15-21 of the CRST.

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off14.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.2
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On5.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.6
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-9.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.1
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The activity of daily living score adds together all responses to questions 15-21 of the CRST.

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off13.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.1
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On5.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.7
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Activity of Daily Living Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-8.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.5
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Bilateral Stimulation, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. For those patients that had bilateral stimulation, the site physician will evaluate the patient's non-target side after 180 days of bilateral stimulation.

Time frame: Following 180 days of stimulation

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Bilateral Stimulation, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.67 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.87
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Bilateral Stimulation, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On0.95 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.89
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Bilateral Stimulation, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.72 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Bilateral Stimulation, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. For those patients that had bilateral stimulation, the site physician will evaluate the patient's non-target side after 180 days of bilateral stimulation.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Bilateral Stimulation, As Assessed by the Site Physician2.82 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.76
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Blind Reviewer

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The blind reviewer will evaluate the patient's handwriting according to the CRST (scale 0-4).

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerStimulation Off1.69 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerStimulation On0.62 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.72
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerMean Difference-1.07 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.06
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's handwriting according to the CRST (scale 0-4).

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician2.66 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.97
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's handwriting according to the CRST (scale 0-4).

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.32 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.14
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On0.90 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.87
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.42 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's handwriting according to the CRST (scale 0-4).

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.22 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.08
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On0.91 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.89
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.32 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.06
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's handwriting according to the CRST (scale 0-4).

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.18 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.14
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On0.93 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.91
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Handwriting for Target Side Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.25 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.95
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's pouring ability according to the CRST

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site Physician2.56 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.98
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's pouring ability according to the CRST

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.08 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.19
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On0.57 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.76
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.52 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.11
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's pouring ability according to the CRST

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.25 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.14
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On0.68 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.9
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.57 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.17
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The site physician will evaluate the patient's pouring ability according to the CRST

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.16 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.31
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On0.62 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.91
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Mean Pouring From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.54 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.06
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms.

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.41 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.96
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.74 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On0.67 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.7
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms.

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.55 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.12
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On0.62 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.79
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.94 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.16
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician3.10 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.62
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms.

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.41 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.98
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On0.75 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.78
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Target Limb Severity Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.66 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.07
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The motor score adds together all responses to the tremor assessment for questions 1-9 of the CRST (whether or not the specific side is being treated).

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off13.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.8
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On7.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.8
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-5.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.8
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The motor score adds together all responses to the tremor assessment for questions 1-9 of the CRST (whether or not the specific side is being treated).

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician16.9 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5.9
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The motor score adds together all responses to the tremor assessment for questions 1-9 of the CRST (whether or not the specific side is being treated).

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On7.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.1
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off13.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.9
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-6.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.8
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The motor score adds together all responses to the tremor assessment for questions 1-9 of the CRST (whether or not the specific side is being treated).

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off14.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.8
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On7.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 5
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Mean Total Motor Score, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-7.4 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 6.6
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Non-Target Limb Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. For those patients that had bilateral stimulation, the site physician will evaluate the patient's non-target side after 180 days with only the second side system On

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Non-Target Limb Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site Physician2.84 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.8
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Non-Target Limb Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. For those patients that had bilateral stimulation, the site physician will evaluate the patient's non-target side after 180 days with only the second side system On

Time frame: Following 180 days of stimulation

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Non-Target Limb Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation Off2.73 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.9
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Non-Target Limb Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianStimulation On1.11 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.07
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation-Non-Target Limb Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianMean Difference-1.62 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.06
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Pouring Ability From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Blind Reviewer

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. The blind reviewer will evaluate the patient's pouring ability according to the CRST

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Pouring Ability From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerStimulation Off1.56 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.13
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Pouring Ability From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerStimulation On0.70 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.86
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Pouring Ability From Target Side Severity Scores, As Assessed by the Blind ReviewerMean Difference-0.86 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.09
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Target Limb Responder Analysis, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. During responder analysis, a 2-point reduction in kinetic tremor or postural tremor between stimulation Off and stimulation On show an improvement in activities of daily living was considered a response, was also performed using the site physician's ratings.

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Target Limb Responder Analysis, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBetween Stimulation OFF and Stimulation ON69 Participants
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Target Limb Responder Analysis, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBetween Baseline and Stimulation ON98 Participants
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Target Limb Responder Analysis, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. During responder analysis, a 2-point reduction in kinetic tremor or postural tremor between stimulation Off and stimulation On show an improvement in activities of daily living was considered a response, was also performed using the site physician's ratings.

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Target Limb Responder Analysis, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBetween Stimulation OFF and Stimulation ON67 Participants
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Target Limb Responder Analysis, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBetween Baseline and Stimulation ON98 Participants
Secondary

Clinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Target Limb Responder Analysis, As Assessed by the Site Physician

The Fahn, Tolosa, Marin Tremor Rating Scale (referred to as the CRST), is a rating tool to assess the severity of postural, isometric, kinetic and task specific tremor in the dominant and non-dominant sides of the head, trunk and limbs of patients with ET. The CRST utilizes a 0 to 4 point scale where 0 indicates non-symptomatic (normal) and 4 indicates the most severe rating of the patient's tremor symptoms. During responder analysis, a 2-point reduction in kinetic tremor or postural tremor between stimulation Off and stimulation On show an improvement in activities of daily living was considered a response, was also performed using the site physician's ratings.

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Target Limb Responder Analysis, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBetween Stimulation OFF and Stimulation ON72 Participants
StimulationClinical Rating Scale for Tremor (CRST) Evaluation- Target Limb Responder Analysis, As Assessed by the Site PhysicianBetween Baseline and Stimulation ON97 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment by Caregiver

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire that measures a global assessment of the patient quality of life and the caregiver's interpretation of the patient's quality of life

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverNo disability21 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverMild disability26 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverModerate disability11 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverMarked disability6 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverSevere disability2 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment by Caregiver

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire that measures a global assessment of the patient quality of life and the caregiver's interpretation of the patient's quality of life

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverMarked disability4 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverNo disability25 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverMild disability28 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverModerate disability11 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverSevere disability2 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment by Caregiver

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire that measures a global assessment of the patient quality of life and the caregiver's interpretation of the patient's quality of life

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverSevere disability19 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverNo disability0 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverMild disability2 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverModerate disability15 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverMarked disability32 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment by Caregiver

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire that measures a global assessment of the patient quality of life and the caregiver's interpretation of the patient's quality of life

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverNo disability19 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverMild disability33 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverModerate disability13 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverMarked disability5 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by CaregiverSevere disability2 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment by Patient

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire in which patients assess their own global outcome at each visit

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientNo disability38 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientMild disability45 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientModerate disability20 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientMarked disability6 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientSevere disability1 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment by Patient

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire in which patients assess their own global outcome at each visit

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientNo disability35 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientMild disability50 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientModerate disability21 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientMarked disability11 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientSevere disability1 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment by Patient

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire in which patients assess their own global outcome at each visit

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientNo disability28 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientMild disability57 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientModerate disability25 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientMarked disability9 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientSevere disability3 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment by Patient

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire in which patients assess their own global outcome at each visit

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientNo disability2 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientMild disability3 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientModerate disability27 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientMarked disability59 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment by PatientSevere disability32 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment Scores by Examiner

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire that measures a global assessment of the patient quality of life and the examiner's interpretation of the patient's quality of life.

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerSevere disability2 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerNo disability28 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerMild disability66 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerModerate disability21 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerMarked disability5 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment Scores by Examiner

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire that measures a global assessment of the patient quality of life and the examiner's interpretation of the patient's quality of life.

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerNo disability31 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerMild disability57 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerModerate disability25 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerMarked disability5 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerSevere disability0 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment Scores by Examiner

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire that measures a global assessment of the patient quality of life and the examiner's interpretation of the patient's quality of life.

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerNo disability36 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerMild disability55 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerModerate disability14 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerMarked disability4 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerSevere disability1 Participants
Secondary

Global Assessment Scores by Examiner

Global outcome measures are a self-rated questionnaire that measures a global assessment of the patient quality of life and the examiner's interpretation of the patient's quality of life.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerNo disability0 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerMild disability2 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerModerate disability35 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerMarked disability68 Participants
StimulationGlobal Assessment Scores by ExaminerSevere disability17 Participants
Secondary

Mini Mental State Exam (MMSE) for Examination of Mental Status

The Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) is a 30-point questionnaire that is used extensively in clinical and research settings to measure cognitive impairment. It examines functions including registration (repeating named prompts), attention and calculation, recall, language, ability to follow simple commands and orientation. Any score of 24 or more (out of 30) indicates a normal cognition.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationMini Mental State Exam (MMSE) for Examination of Mental Status29.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Would Choose to Receive the DBS System Again

At each visit, patients will be asked if they would undergo the DBS procedure again

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationNumber of Participants Who Would Choose to Receive the DBS System Again98 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Would Choose to Receive the DBS System Again

At each visit, patients will be asked if they would undergo the DBS procedure again

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationNumber of Participants Who Would Choose to Receive the DBS System Again106 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Would Choose to Receive the DBS System Again

At each visit, patients will be asked if they would undergo the DBS procedure again

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationNumber of Participants Who Would Choose to Receive the DBS System Again111 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Would Recommend the DBS System

At each visit, patients will be asked if they would recommend the DBS system to others

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationNumber of Participants Who Would Recommend the DBS System113 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Would Recommend the DBS System

At each visit, patients will be asked if they would recommend the DBS system to others

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationNumber of Participants Who Would Recommend the DBS System117 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants Who Would Recommend the DBS System

At each visit, patients will be asked if they would recommend the DBS system to others

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationNumber of Participants Who Would Recommend the DBS System98 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control Symptoms

At each visit, patients will be asked about their satisfaction with the DBS system's functioning and ability to control symptoms

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsNot Satisfied7 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsVery Unsatisfied3 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsVery Satisfied76 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsSatisfied22 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsIndifferent2 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control Symptoms

At each visit, patients will be asked about their satisfaction with the DBS system's functioning and ability to control symptoms

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsVery Satisfied78 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsSatisfied27 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsIndifferent7 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsNot Satisfied3 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsVery Unsatisfied7 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control Symptoms

At each visit, patients will be asked about their satisfaction with the DBS system's functioning and ability to control symptoms

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsVery Satisfied77 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsSatisfied28 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsIndifferent4 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsNot Satisfied5 Participants
StimulationNumber of Participants With Satisfaction With the DBS System's Functioning and Ability to Control SymptomsVery Unsatisfied4 Participants
Secondary

Quality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary Index

The QUEST questionnaire consists of 30 items, which are rated from 0 to 4, corresponding to the frequency (from never to always). Those 30 items assess how tremor impacts a function or how it can be associated with feelings or attitudes. The 30 items contribute to five sub scales (number of items contributing to each scale in parentheses): Physical/ADL (9), Psychosocial (9), Communication (3), Hobbies/Leisure (3), and Work/Finances (6). The score on each sub scale is expressed as a percentage of the total score possible, with a higher score indicating greater dissatisfaction with that domain of QOL. As the scores were expressed as percentages, if a question was unanswered it was excluded and percentages were calculated based on the remaining answers. A total or quest summary index (QSI) was computed by calculating the mean of the five scales. Maximal score of 100 indicates worse quality of life, while minimal score 0 corresponds to best quality of life.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationQuality of Life in Essential Tremor (QUEST): Overall Summary Index49.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.6
Secondary

SF36 Components and Individual Domains

The SF-36 questionnaire is a measure of health status with 36 items across 8 domains. The eight domains are separated into two summary scores of four domains, the physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). The SF-36 score is transformed into a scale of 0-100, with 100 indicating no disability. PCS and MCS are scaled in comparison to population norms to reflect a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 for the general population of the United States.

Time frame: Baseline

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationSF36 Components and Individual DomainsPhysical Component Summary45.62 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.49
StimulationSF36 Components and Individual DomainsMental Component Summary50.11 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.9
Secondary

SF36 Components and Individual Domains

The SF-36 questionnaire is a measure of health status with 36 items across 8 domains. The eight domains are separated into two summary scores of four domains, the physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). The SF-36 score is transformed into a scale of 0-100, with 100 indicating no disability. PCS and MCS are scaled in comparison to population norms to reflect a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 for the general population of the United States.

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationSF36 Components and Individual DomainsPhysical Component Summary46.82 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.94
StimulationSF36 Components and Individual DomainsMental Component Summary51.85 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.51
Secondary

SF36 Components and Individual Domains

The SF-36 questionnaire is a measure of health status with 36 items across 8 domains. The eight domains are separated into two summary scores of four domains, the physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). The SF-36 score is transformed into a scale of 0-100, with 100 indicating no disability. PCS and MCS are scaled in comparison to population norms to reflect a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 for the general population of the United States.

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationSF36 Components and Individual DomainsPhysical Component Summary45.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.79
StimulationSF36 Components and Individual DomainsMental Component Summary52.21 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.15
Secondary

SF36 Components and Individual Domains

The SF-36 questionnaire is a measure of health status with 36 items across 8 domains. The eight domains are separated into two summary scores of four domains, the physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS). The SF-36 score is transformed into a scale of 0-100, with 100 indicating no disability. PCS and MCS are scaled in comparison to population norms to reflect a mean of 50 and standard deviation of 10 for the general population of the United States.

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
StimulationSF36 Components and Individual DomainsPhysical Component Summary47.21 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.45
StimulationSF36 Components and Individual DomainsMental Component Summary52.71 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.07
Secondary

Subjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of System

Subjective assessment includes changes in their ET symptoms since the last visit indicated as marked improvement, moderate improvement, mild improvement, worsening, or no change.

Time frame: Day 180

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMarked improvement22 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemModerate improvement12 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMild improvement17 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemUnchanged46 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMild worsening18 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemModerate worsening3 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMarked worsening0 Participants
Secondary

Subjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of System

Subjective assessment includes changes in their ET symptoms since the last visit indicated as marked improvement, moderate improvement, mild improvement, worsening, or no change.

Time frame: Day 90

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMarked improvement76 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemModerate improvement23 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMild improvement8 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemUnchanged6 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMild worsening7 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemModerate worsening0 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMarked worsening2 Participants
Secondary

Subjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of System

Subjective assessment includes changes in their ET symptoms since the last visit indicated as marked improvement, moderate improvement, mild improvement, worsening, or no change.

Time frame: Day 365

Population: The number of participants analyzed includes subjects who were available at that time of analysis

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMarked improvement17 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemModerate improvement13 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMild improvement16 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemUnchanged45 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMild worsening14 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemModerate worsening3 Participants
StimulationSubjective Assessment by Patient Since Activation of SystemMarked worsening1 Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026