Objectives

This study aimed to determine agreement between reported percentage pain reduction (RPPR) and calculated percentage pain reduction (CPPR) in patients with percutaneous spinal cord stimulation (SCS) implants, and to correlate RPPR and CPPR with patient satisfaction. We also sought to determine which patient-reported outcome measures are most improved in patients with SCS.

Materials and Methods

Fifty patients with percutaneous spinal cord stimulator implants with a mean follow-up of 51.1 months were interviewed and surveyed to assess their pain level, impression of degree of pain relief, satisfaction with the therapy, and desire to have the device again. Baseline pain level was obtained from their preimplant records.

Results

Overall, RPPR was found to be 53.3%, whereas CPPR was 44.4%. Of all patients, 21 reported <50% pain reduction; however, most of these (12/21, 57%) were satisfied with the outcome of therapy. In terms of individual improvement in outcomes, activities of daily life was the most improved measure at 82%, followed by mood, sleep, medication use, and health care utilization at 74%, 62%, 50%, and 48%, respectively.

Conclusions

RPPR appears to be a complex outcome measure that may not agree with CPPR. Overall RPPR is greater than the CPPR. On the basis of our data, these independently valid measures should not be used interchangeably. A 50% pain reduction threshold is not a requisite for patient satisfaction and desire to have the device again. Activities of daily living was the most improved measure in this cohort, followed by mood, sleep, medication usage, and decrease in health care utilization.

中文翻译：

---

脊髓刺激治疗患者的疼痛减轻报告与计算结果之间存在差异，且患者满意度与疼痛缓解程度之间缺乏一致性

目标

本研究旨在确定经皮脊髓刺激 (SCS) 植入患者报告的疼痛减轻百分比 (RPPR) 和计算的疼痛减轻百分比 (CPPR) 之间的一致性，并将 RPPR 和 CPPR 与患者满意度相关联。我们还试图确定哪些患者报告的结果指标在 SCS 患者中得到最大程度的改善。

材料和方法

对 50 名经皮脊髓刺激器植入患者进行了访谈和调查，平均随访时间为 51.1 个月，以评估他们的疼痛程度、疼痛缓解程度的印象、对治疗的满意度以及再次使用该装置的愿望。基线疼痛水平是从他们的植入前记录中获得的。

结果

总体而言，RPPR 为 53.3%，而 CPPR 为 44.4%。在所有患者中，21 名患者报告疼痛减轻 <50%；然而，大多数人（12/21，57%）对治疗结果感到满意。就个人结果改善而言，日常生活活动改善最多，达到 82%，其次是情绪、睡眠、药物使用和医疗保健利用率，分别为 74%、62%、50% 和 48%。

结论

RPPR 似乎是一个复杂的结果衡量标准，可能与 CPPR 不一致。总体 RPPR 大于 CPPR。根据我们的数据，这些独立有效的措施不应互换使用。50% 的疼痛减轻阈值并不是患者满意度和再次使用该设备的必要条件。日常生活活动是该队列中改善最多的指标，其次是情绪、睡眠、药物使用和医疗保健利用率的减少。