Skip to content

The SNAP Trial: SPRINT® Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for the Treatment of Neuropathic Post-Amputation Pain

The SNAP Trial: SPRINT® Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for the Treatment of Neuropathic Post-Amputation Pain in a Randomized, Double-blinded, Placebo-controlled, Multicenter Trial

Status
Terminated
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03783689
Acronym
SNAP
Enrollment
38
Registered
2018-12-21
Start date
2018-12-18
Completion date
2022-09-22
Last updated
2023-11-29

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

Conditions

Amputation, Neuropathic Pain

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to determine if pain can be relieved by delivering small amounts of electricity (called electrical stimulation) to the nerves in an individual's amputated leg.This study will involve the use of a Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System that is made by SPR Therapeutics (the sponsor of the study). The PNS System was cleared by the FDA for up to 60 days of use for the management of chronic pain, including extremity (leg) pain.

Interventions

The SPRINT System delivers mild electrical stimulation to nerves in the residual limb. The SPRINT System includes two small wires (called Leads) that are placed through the skin in the upper leg. It also includes a device worn on the body that delivers stimulation (called the SPRINT Stimulator).

Sponsors

SPR Therapeutics, Inc.
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

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

Eligibility

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

Inclusion criteria

Key Inclusion Criteria: * At least 21 years old * Lower extremity amputation * Experiencing residual limb (stump) and/or phantom limb pain * Healed amputation and healthy residual limb based upon the investigator's evaluation Key

Exclusion criteria

* Conditions with increased risk of infection (e.g., compromised immune system or history of recurrent skin infections) * Implanted electronic device * Pregnancy

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Subjects With ≥50% Reduction in Average Post-Amputation Pain (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])Baseline and 5 to 8 weeks post-start of treatment (SOT)All subjects were asked to complete daily diaries to record their average residual limb pain and/or phantom pain intensities during the past 24 hours on each day of a 7-day period using an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. The average pain scores were calculated across the 7-day period for each region of pain at baseline and across weeks 5 to 8 post-start of treatment. Percent reduction was then calculated for each subject's qualifying region of pain (residual limb and/or phantom limb pain with qualifying average pain intensity at baseline). To be considered a success, subjects must have experienced ≥ 50% reduction in all qualifying regions of pain compared to their 7-day baseline diary average pain score(s). The number of successes is presented.
Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse EventUp to 14 months for each Group 1 subject and up to 18 months for each Group 2 subject (time from baseline to last study visit)At each study visit following the baseline assessment at Visit 1, subjects were questioned if any changes in their medical status or condition have occurred since their previous visit. If the subject experienced a change that was a study-related adverse event, an Adverse Event Form was completed by the site. The number of subjects that experienced at least one study-related adverse event is reported here.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) SurveyVisit 7 (4-weeks post-Start of Therapy [SOT]), Visit 11 (8-weeks post-SOT), Visit 13 (3-months post-SOT), Visit 14 (6-months post-SOT), and Visit 16 (12-months post-SOT)The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Survey asks subjects to rate their improvement with treatment on a 7-point scale ranging from -3 to 0 to +3, where -3 represents very much worse, 0 is no change, and +3 represents very much improved as compared to before stimulation treatment. The subjects combine all the components of their experience into one overall score. The mean rank score of each group was calculated for each time frame.
Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)Visit 1 (Baseline), Visit 7 (4-weeks post-Start of Treatment [SOT]), and Visit 11 (8-weeks post-SOT)The Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) questionnaire has 13 questions that assess rumination, magnification, and helplessness. Subjects are asked to think back on painful experiences in the past and reflect on how often they had specific thoughts or feelings. Each of the 13 questions is scored on a 5-point scale where 0 represents not at all, and 4 represents all the time. The scores from each question were summed for each subject to provide a total PCS score, with a possible range from 0 to 52 with higher scores indicating a greater tendency to catastrophize pain (i.e. a higher score indicates a worse outcome). The mean score for each time point is presented.
Pain Medication UsageBaseline, 1 to 4 weeks post-start of treatment (SOT), 5 to 8 weeks post-SOT, 3 months post-SOT, 6 months post-SOT, and 12 months post-SOTSubjects completed 7-day diaries in which they tracked their daily use of analgesic medications. Opioid analgesic usage was converted into a morphine equivalent dosage (MED), which is measured in units of morphine milligram equivalents (MME), for subjects who were using opioid analgesics at baseline. The average MED was calculated for each subject at each time point.
Pain InterferenceVisit 1 (Baseline), Visit 7 (4-weeks post-start of treatment [SOT]), Visit 11 (8-weeks post-SOT), Visit 13 (3-months post-SOT), Visit 14 (6-months post-SOT), and Visit 16 (12-months post-SOT)Question 9 of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-9) is a 7-part question that assesses the level of interference that subjects experience in their daily lives due to pain. The 7 categories are general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life. Subjects were asked to rate how much their post-amputation residual and/or phantom limb pains interfere with each aspect on an 11-point numerical scale where 0 represents Does Not Interfere and 10 represents Completely Interferes. The average of these 7 scores was calculated for each subject at each time point. Percent reduction was then calculated for each subject's qualifying region of pain (residual limb and/or phantom limb pain with qualifying average pain intensity at baseline). To be considered a success, subjects must have experienced ≥ 50% reduction in all qualifying regions of pain compared to baseline. The number of successes is presented.
Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Residual Limb Pain (RLP) 5 to 8 Weeks After Start of TreatmentBaseline and 5 to 8 weeks post-start of treatment (SOT)All subjects were asked to complete daily diaries to record their average residual limb pain and/or phantom pain intensities during the past 24 hours on each day of a 7-day period using an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. The average residual limb pain scores were calculated across the 7-day period at baseline and for weeks 5 to 8 post-start of treatment (for subjects with qualifying residual limb average pain intensity at baseline). Percent reduction from baseline was then calculated, and the number of subjects that experienced ≥ 50% reduction in residual limb pain are reported.
Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Phantom Limb Pain (PLP) 5 to 8 Weeks After Start of TreatmentBaseline and 5 to 8 weeks post-start of treatment (SOT)All subjects were asked to complete daily diaries to record their average residual limb pain and/or phantom pain intensities during the past 24 hours on each day of a 7-day period using an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. The average phantom limb pain scores were calculated across the 7-day period at baseline and for weeks 5 to 8 post-start of treatment (for subjects with qualifying phantom limb average pain intensity at baseline). Percent reduction from baseline was then calculated, and the number of subjects that experienced ≥ 50% reduction in phantom limb pain are reported.
Durability of Treatment Effect on Average Post-Amputation Pain Intensity (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])Baseline, 3-months post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 6-months post-SOT, and 12-months post-SOTAll subjects were asked to complete daily diaries to record their average residual limb pain and/or phantom limb pain intensities during the past 24 hours on each day of a 7-day period using an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. The average pain scores were calculated across the 7-day period for each region of pain at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months post-start of treatment. Percent reduction was then calculated for each subject's qualifying region of pain (residual limb and/or phantom limb pain with qualifying average pain intensity at baseline) at each time point. To be considered a success, subjects must have experienced ≥ 50% reduction in all qualifying regions of pain compared to their 7-day baseline diary average pain score(s). The number of successes is presented.
Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Post-Amputation Pain (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP]) 1 to 4 Weeks After Start of TreatmentBaseline and 1 to 4 weeks post-start of treatment (SOT)All subjects were asked to complete daily diaries to record their average residual limb pain and/or phantom pain intensities during the past 24 hours on each day of a 7-day period using an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. The average pain scores were calculated across the 7-day period for each region of pain at baseline and across weeks 1 to 4 post-start of treatment (i.e., the first half of the 8-week treatment period). Percent reduction was then calculated for each subject's qualifying region of pain (residual limb and/or phantom limb pain with qualifying average pain intensity at baseline). To be considered a success, subjects must have experienced ≥ 50% reduction in all qualifying regions of pain compared to their 7-day baseline diary average pain score(s). The number of successes is presented.
Pain Disability Index (PDI)Visit 1 (Baseline), Visit 7 (4-weeks post-start of treatment [SOT]), Visit 11 (8-weeks post-SOT), Visit 13 (3-months post-SOT), Visit 14 (6-months post-SOT), and Visit 16 (12-months post-SOT)The Pain Disability Index (PDI) is a validated survey measuring the degree to which pain disrupts 7 categories of life activities on a scale from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater disability. The 7 scores were summed for each subject to provide an overall pain disability score ranging from 0 to 70. A score of 0 indicates no disability while a score of 70 signifies that all of the activities in which the individual would normally be involved have been totally disrupted or prevented by pain. To be considered a success, subjects must have a ≥ 10-point reduction in their total PDI score at each time point compared to their baseline score. The number of subjects successful at each time point is reported.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Pre-assignment details

After obtaining informed consent, subjects were evaluated for eligibility.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Group 1 (Treatment)
Subjects in Group 1 were consented and met all eligibility criteria prior to randomization. These subjects had Leads placed in their residual limb and received electrical stimulation for up to 8 weeks via the SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System.
19
Group 2 (Control)
Subjects in Group 2 were consented and met all eligibility criteria prior to randomization. These subjects had Leads placed in their residual limb and received up to 8 weeks of sham stimulation. Three months after start of sham treatment, subjects were given the option to crossover and receive stimulation therapy via the SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System.
19
Total38

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000FG001
Overall StudyAdverse Event20
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up21
Overall StudyPhysician Decision21
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject33

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicGroup 2 (Control)TotalGroup 1 (Treatment)
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
6 Participants11 Participants5 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
13 Participants27 Participants14 Participants
Age, Continuous62.0 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.5
59.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.5
56.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12
Employment Status
Currently Working
4 Participants7 Participants3 Participants
Employment Status
Disabled / Retired (due to health)
10 Participants19 Participants9 Participants
Employment Status
Other (self-employed)
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Employment Status
Retired (not due to health)
4 Participants8 Participants4 Participants
Employment Status
Student
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Employment Status
Unemployed
1 Participants2 Participants1 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
1 Participants3 Participants2 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
18 Participants35 Participants17 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Location of Amputation
Left Leg: Above Knee Amputation
4 Participants6 Participants2 Participants
Location of Amputation
Left Leg: Below Knee Amputation
4 Participants11 Participants7 Participants
Location of Amputation
Right Leg: Above Knee Amputation
5 Participants8 Participants3 Participants
Location of Amputation
Right Leg: Below Knee Amputation
6 Participants13 Participants7 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants2 Participants2 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants1 Participants1 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
3 Participants5 Participants2 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
1 Participants1 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants0 Participants0 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
15 Participants29 Participants14 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
19 participants38 participants19 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
8 Participants12 Participants4 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
11 Participants26 Participants15 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
EG002
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 190 / 190 / 9
other
Total, other adverse events
10 / 196 / 192 / 9
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 190 / 190 / 9

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse Event

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

Time frame: Up to 14 months for each Group 1 subject and up to 18 months for each Group 2 subject (time from baseline to last study visit)

Population: Safety Set

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment)Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse Event10 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse Event6 Participants
Primary

Number of Subjects With ≥50% Reduction in Average Post-Amputation Pain (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])

All subjects were asked to complete daily diaries to record their average residual limb pain and/or phantom pain intensities during the past 24 hours on each day of a 7-day period using an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. The average pain scores were calculated across the 7-day period for each region of pain at baseline and across weeks 5 to 8 post-start of treatment. Percent reduction was then calculated for each subject's qualifying region of pain (residual limb and/or phantom limb pain with qualifying average pain intensity at baseline). To be considered a success, subjects must have experienced ≥ 50% reduction in all qualifying regions of pain compared to their 7-day baseline diary average pain score(s). The number of successes is presented.

Time frame: Baseline and 5 to 8 weeks post-start of treatment (SOT)

Population: Per Protocol Set presented.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment)Number of Subjects With ≥50% Reduction in Average Post-Amputation Pain (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])6 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Number of Subjects With ≥50% Reduction in Average Post-Amputation Pain (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])3 Participants
Secondary

Durability of Treatment Effect on Average Post-Amputation Pain Intensity (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])

All subjects were asked to complete daily diaries to record their average residual limb pain and/or phantom limb pain intensities during the past 24 hours on each day of a 7-day period using an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. The average pain scores were calculated across the 7-day period for each region of pain at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months post-start of treatment. Percent reduction was then calculated for each subject's qualifying region of pain (residual limb and/or phantom limb pain with qualifying average pain intensity at baseline) at each time point. To be considered a success, subjects must have experienced ≥ 50% reduction in all qualifying regions of pain compared to their 7-day baseline diary average pain score(s). The number of successes is presented.

Time frame: Baseline, 3-months post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 6-months post-SOT, and 12-months post-SOT

Population: Per Protocol Set presented. Data were not available for one Group 1 subject at 6-months and for three at 12-months. In accordance with the planned study protocol, Group 2 subjects were not assessed for this outcome at 6- and 12-months due to crossover to receive active stimulation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment)Durability of Treatment Effect on Average Post-Amputation Pain Intensity (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])3-months Post-SOT4 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment)Durability of Treatment Effect on Average Post-Amputation Pain Intensity (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])6-months Post-SOT4 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment)Durability of Treatment Effect on Average Post-Amputation Pain Intensity (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])12-months Post-SOT3 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Durability of Treatment Effect on Average Post-Amputation Pain Intensity (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])3-months Post-SOT3 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Durability of Treatment Effect on Average Post-Amputation Pain Intensity (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])6-months Post-SOT0 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Durability of Treatment Effect on Average Post-Amputation Pain Intensity (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP])12-months Post-SOT0 Participants
Secondary

Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Phantom Limb Pain (PLP) 5 to 8 Weeks After Start of Treatment

All subjects were asked to complete daily diaries to record their average residual limb pain and/or phantom pain intensities during the past 24 hours on each day of a 7-day period using an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. The average phantom limb pain scores were calculated across the 7-day period at baseline and for weeks 5 to 8 post-start of treatment (for subjects with qualifying phantom limb average pain intensity at baseline). Percent reduction from baseline was then calculated, and the number of subjects that experienced ≥ 50% reduction in phantom limb pain are reported.

Time frame: Baseline and 5 to 8 weeks post-start of treatment (SOT)

Population: Per Protocol Set of subjects that qualified with phantom limb pain presented.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment)Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Phantom Limb Pain (PLP) 5 to 8 Weeks After Start of Treatment7 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Phantom Limb Pain (PLP) 5 to 8 Weeks After Start of Treatment3 Participants
Secondary

Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Post-Amputation Pain (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP]) 1 to 4 Weeks After Start of Treatment

All subjects were asked to complete daily diaries to record their average residual limb pain and/or phantom pain intensities during the past 24 hours on each day of a 7-day period using an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. The average pain scores were calculated across the 7-day period for each region of pain at baseline and across weeks 1 to 4 post-start of treatment (i.e., the first half of the 8-week treatment period). Percent reduction was then calculated for each subject's qualifying region of pain (residual limb and/or phantom limb pain with qualifying average pain intensity at baseline). To be considered a success, subjects must have experienced ≥ 50% reduction in all qualifying regions of pain compared to their 7-day baseline diary average pain score(s). The number of successes is presented.

Time frame: Baseline and 1 to 4 weeks post-start of treatment (SOT)

Population: Per Protocol Set presented. One Group 2 subject only had 3 days of diary data during week 3 post-SOT.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment)Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Post-Amputation Pain (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP]) 1 to 4 Weeks After Start of Treatment3 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Post-Amputation Pain (Residual Limb Pain [RLP] and/or Phantom Limb Pain [PLP]) 1 to 4 Weeks After Start of Treatment3 Participants
Secondary

Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Residual Limb Pain (RLP) 5 to 8 Weeks After Start of Treatment

All subjects were asked to complete daily diaries to record their average residual limb pain and/or phantom pain intensities during the past 24 hours on each day of a 7-day period using an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents No Pain and 10 represents Pain as bad as you can imagine. The average residual limb pain scores were calculated across the 7-day period at baseline and for weeks 5 to 8 post-start of treatment (for subjects with qualifying residual limb average pain intensity at baseline). Percent reduction from baseline was then calculated, and the number of subjects that experienced ≥ 50% reduction in residual limb pain are reported.

Time frame: Baseline and 5 to 8 weeks post-start of treatment (SOT)

Population: Per Protocol Set of subjects that qualified with residual limb pain presented.

ArmMeasureValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment)Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Residual Limb Pain (RLP) 5 to 8 Weeks After Start of Treatment5 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Number of Subjects With ≥ 50% Reduction in Average Residual Limb Pain (RLP) 5 to 8 Weeks After Start of Treatment3 Participants
Secondary

Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)

The Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS) questionnaire has 13 questions that assess rumination, magnification, and helplessness. Subjects are asked to think back on painful experiences in the past and reflect on how often they had specific thoughts or feelings. Each of the 13 questions is scored on a 5-point scale where 0 represents not at all, and 4 represents all the time. The scores from each question were summed for each subject to provide a total PCS score, with a possible range from 0 to 52 with higher scores indicating a greater tendency to catastrophize pain (i.e. a higher score indicates a worse outcome). The mean score for each time point is presented.

Time frame: Visit 1 (Baseline), Visit 7 (4-weeks post-Start of Treatment [SOT]), and Visit 11 (8-weeks post-SOT)

Population: Per Protocol Set presented. Data were not available for one Group 2 subject at Visit 7.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)Visit 1: Baseline17.6 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.1
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)Visit 7: 4-weeks Post-SOT12.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 10
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)Visit 11: 8-weeks Post-SOT8.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.4
Group 2 (Control)Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)Visit 1: Baseline24.1 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 11.6
Group 2 (Control)Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)Visit 7: 4-weeks Post-SOT17.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 14.3
Group 2 (Control)Pain Catastrophizing Scale (PCS)Visit 11: 8-weeks Post-SOT19.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 15.4
Secondary

Pain Disability Index (PDI)

The Pain Disability Index (PDI) is a validated survey measuring the degree to which pain disrupts 7 categories of life activities on a scale from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater disability. The 7 scores were summed for each subject to provide an overall pain disability score ranging from 0 to 70. A score of 0 indicates no disability while a score of 70 signifies that all of the activities in which the individual would normally be involved have been totally disrupted or prevented by pain. To be considered a success, subjects must have a ≥ 10-point reduction in their total PDI score at each time point compared to their baseline score. The number of subjects successful at each time point is reported.

Time frame: Visit 1 (Baseline), Visit 7 (4-weeks post-start of treatment [SOT]), Visit 11 (8-weeks post-SOT), Visit 13 (3-months post-SOT), Visit 14 (6-months post-SOT), and Visit 16 (12-months post-SOT)

Population: Per Protocol Set presented. Data were not available for one Group 2 subject at Visit 7, one Group 1 subject at Visit 14, and three Group 1 subjects at Visit 16. In accordance with the planned study protocol, Group 2 subjects were not assessed for this outcome at 6- and 12-months due to crossover to receive active stimulation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Disability Index (PDI)Visit 16: 12-months Post-SOT6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Disability Index (PDI)Visit 13: 3-months Post-SOT12 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Disability Index (PDI)Visit 14: 6-months Post-SOT10 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Disability Index (PDI)Visit 7: 4-weeks Post-SOT10 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Disability Index (PDI)Visit 11: 8-weeks Post-SOT10 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Pain Disability Index (PDI)Visit 7: 4-weeks Post-SOT9 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Pain Disability Index (PDI)Visit 13: 3-months Post-SOT5 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Pain Disability Index (PDI)Visit 11: 8-weeks Post-SOT9 Participants
Secondary

Pain Interference

Question 9 of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-9) is a 7-part question that assesses the level of interference that subjects experience in their daily lives due to pain. The 7 categories are general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep, and enjoyment of life. Subjects were asked to rate how much their post-amputation residual and/or phantom limb pains interfere with each aspect on an 11-point numerical scale where 0 represents Does Not Interfere and 10 represents Completely Interferes. The average of these 7 scores was calculated for each subject at each time point. Percent reduction was then calculated for each subject's qualifying region of pain (residual limb and/or phantom limb pain with qualifying average pain intensity at baseline). To be considered a success, subjects must have experienced ≥ 50% reduction in all qualifying regions of pain compared to baseline. The number of successes is presented.

Time frame: Visit 1 (Baseline), Visit 7 (4-weeks post-start of treatment [SOT]), Visit 11 (8-weeks post-SOT), Visit 13 (3-months post-SOT), Visit 14 (6-months post-SOT), and Visit 16 (12-months post-SOT)

Population: Per Protocol Set presented. Data were not available for one Group 1 subject at Visit 14, three Group 1 subjects at Visit 16, and one Group 2 subject at Visit 7. In accordance with the planned study protocol, Group 2 subjects were not assessed for this outcome at 6- and 12-months due to crossover to receive active stimulation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain InterferenceVisit 16: 12-months Post-SOT6 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain InterferenceVisit 13: 3-months Post-SOT10 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain InterferenceVisit 14: 6-months Post-SOT9 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain InterferenceVisit 7: 4-weeks Post-SOT7 Participants
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain InterferenceVisit 11: 8-weeks Post-SOT10 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Pain InterferenceVisit 7: 4-weeks Post-SOT6 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Pain InterferenceVisit 13: 3-months Post-SOT6 Participants
Group 2 (Control)Pain InterferenceVisit 11: 8-weeks Post-SOT8 Participants
Secondary

Pain Medication Usage

Subjects completed 7-day diaries in which they tracked their daily use of analgesic medications. Opioid analgesic usage was converted into a morphine equivalent dosage (MED), which is measured in units of morphine milligram equivalents (MME), for subjects who were using opioid analgesics at baseline. The average MED was calculated for each subject at each time point.

Time frame: Baseline, 1 to 4 weeks post-start of treatment (SOT), 5 to 8 weeks post-SOT, 3 months post-SOT, 6 months post-SOT, and 12 months post-SOT

Population: Per protocol set presented; only the six subjects that were using opioid analgesics at baseline were included in the analysis. Data were not available for two Group 1 subjects at 12-months post-SOT and for one Group 2 subject at 3-months post-SOT. In accordance with the planned study protocol, Group 2 subjects were not assessed for this outcome at 6- and 12-months due to crossover to receive active stimulation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Medication UsageBaseline32.3 MME (Morphine Milligram Equivalents)Standard Deviation 37.2
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Medication Usage5 to 8 weeks Post-SOT30.4 MME (Morphine Milligram Equivalents)Standard Deviation 38.7
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Medication Usage3-months Post-SOT30.7 MME (Morphine Milligram Equivalents)Standard Deviation 38.9
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Medication Usage6-months Post-SOT21.1 MME (Morphine Milligram Equivalents)Standard Deviation 21.5
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Medication Usage12-months Post-SOT45.0 MME (Morphine Milligram Equivalents)Standard Deviation 0
Group 1 (Treatment)Pain Medication Usage1 to 4 weeks Post-SOT32.4 MME (Morphine Milligram Equivalents)Standard Deviation 36.9
Group 2 (Control)Pain Medication UsageBaseline14.4 MME (Morphine Milligram Equivalents)Standard Deviation 13.7
Group 2 (Control)Pain Medication Usage5 to 8 weeks Post-SOT12.4 MME (Morphine Milligram Equivalents)Standard Deviation 10.4
Group 2 (Control)Pain Medication Usage1 to 4 weeks Post-SOT16.3 MME (Morphine Milligram Equivalents)Standard Deviation 13
Group 2 (Control)Pain Medication Usage3-months Post-SOT9.0 MME (Morphine Milligram Equivalents)Standard Deviation 12.7
Secondary

Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Survey

The Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Survey asks subjects to rate their improvement with treatment on a 7-point scale ranging from -3 to 0 to +3, where -3 represents very much worse, 0 is no change, and +3 represents very much improved as compared to before stimulation treatment. The subjects combine all the components of their experience into one overall score. The mean rank score of each group was calculated for each time frame.

Time frame: Visit 7 (4-weeks post-Start of Therapy [SOT]), Visit 11 (8-weeks post-SOT), Visit 13 (3-months post-SOT), Visit 14 (6-months post-SOT), and Visit 16 (12-months post-SOT)

Population: Per Protocol Set presented. Data were not available for one Group 2 subject at Visit 7, one Group 1 subject at Visit 14, and three Group 1 subjects at Visit 16. In accordance with the planned study protocol, Group 2 subjects were not assessed for this outcome at 6- and 12-months due to crossover to receive active stimulation.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Group 1 (Treatment)Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) SurveyVisit 16: 12-months Post-SOT1.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.3
Group 1 (Treatment)Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) SurveyVisit 7: 4-weeks Post-SOT1.8 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.73
Group 1 (Treatment)Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) SurveyVisit 11: 8-weeks Post-SOT1.5 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.66
Group 1 (Treatment)Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) SurveyVisit 13: 3-months Post-SOT1.2 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0.93
Group 1 (Treatment)Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) SurveyVisit 14: 6-months Post-SOT1.3 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.4
Group 2 (Control)Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) SurveyVisit 7: 4-weeks Post-SOT1.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Group 2 (Control)Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) SurveyVisit 13: 3-months Post-SOT0.75 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.2
Group 2 (Control)Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) SurveyVisit 11: 8-weeks Post-SOT0.88 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.6

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