Post-Amputation PainNCT01996254
Electrical Stimulation for the Treatment of Post-Amputation Pain Using the SPRINT System
A study testing SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System in people with Post-Amputation Pain and Phantom Limb Pain, run by SPR Therapeutics, Inc. at 10 sites in United States.
Trial summary
The purpose of this study is to determine if electrical stimulation (small levels of electricity) can safely and effectively reduce post-amputation pain. This study involves a device called the SPRINT System. The SPRINT System delivers mild electrical stimulation to nerves in the residual limb. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Post-Amputation Pain, Phantom Limb Pain, Residual Limb Pain
- What is being tested?
- SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 28 participants
- Where
- 10 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Oct 2013to 28 Jan 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- At least 18 years old
- Traumatic lower extremity amputation(s)
- Healed amputation and healthy residual limb based upon the investigator's evaluation
Who cannot join
- Change of prescribed medications affecting pain within the past 4 weeks
- Compromised immune system based on medical history
- Implanted electronic device
- Bleeding disorder
- History of valvular heart disease
- Confounding central nervous system injuries and disorders
- History of recurrent skin infections
Trial locations and contacts
10 sites in 1 country.
10 sites in 1 country
United States10 sites
Walter Reed National Military Medical Center
Bethesda, Maryland, 20889
Northwestern University
Chicago, Illinois, 60611
Denver Clinic for Extremities at Risk
Denver, Colorado, 80218
Holy Cross Hospital
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33334
University of California San Diego
La Jolla, California, 92093
Ainsworth Institute of Pain Management
New York, New York, 10022
Arizona Pain
Scottsdale, Arizona, 85258
Premier Pain Centers
Shrewsbury, New Jersey, 07702
International Spine, Pain and Performance Center
Washington D.C., District of Columbia, 20037
Center for Clinical Research
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27103
About this study
Official title: A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Pilot Study of the SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System for the Treatment of Post-Amputation Pain
The purpose of this study is to determine if electrical stimulation (small levels of electricity) can safely and effectively reduce post-amputation pain. This study involves a device called the SPRINT System. The SPRINT System delivers mild electrical stimulation to nerves in the residual limb. The SPRINT System includes a small wire (called a "lead") that is placed through the skin in the upper leg. It also includes a device worn on the body that delivers stimulation (called the SPRINT Stimulator).
- Conditions
- Post-Amputation Pain, Phantom Limb Pain, Residual Limb Pain
- Being tested
- SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System
- Keywords
- electrical stimulation, neurostimulation, neuromodulation, post-amputation pain, phantom limb pain, residual limb pain, neuropathic pain, amputee pain
- Medical subject headings
- Phantom Limb, Neuralgia
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) SystemDevice
Also called SPRINT System, SPRINT, Smartpatch System, Smartpatch
The SPRINT System is an Investigational Device which delivers mild electrical stimulation to nerves in the residual limb. The SPRINT System includes a small wire (called a "Lead") that is placed through the skin in the upper leg. It also includes a device worn on the body that delivers stimulation (called the SPRINT Stimulator).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| SPRINT Group 1 | Experimental | Subjects in Group 1 will have a Lead placed in the residual limb in the upper leg. These subjects will then use the SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System and will receive electrical stimulation for 8 weeks. Receives: Device: SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System |
| SPRINT Group 2 | Sham comparator | Subjects in Group 2 will have a Lead placed in the residual limb in the upper leg. These subjects will then use the SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System for a total of 8 weeks. They will receive 4 weeks of stimulation and 4 weeks with no stimulation. Receives: Device: SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) and Group 2 (Control) Subjects That Achieved ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain in the First 4 Weeks of Treatment
Subjects completed daily diaries to record their average daily pain intensity scores for each qualifying region of pain (phantom limb pain and/or residual limb pain). These pain intensity questions were excerpted from the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 5 (BPI-5). The BPI-5 is an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents "No Pain" and 10 represents "Pain as bad as you can imagine." Post-amputation pain intensity scores were determined for each subject by taking the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores from their diaries at Baseline compared to the mean score for the same region(s) of pain reported over 4 weeks after the Start of Treatment (i.e., the average of all diary scores during this period). Subjects that achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their qualifying area(s) of pain were considered successful. Missing diary data were replaced using 1-week BPI-5 recall; if recall scores were unavailable, baseline values were imputed.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 1-4 Post-Start of Treatment
Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse Event in Treatment and Control Groups
At each study visit following the baseline assessment at Visit 1, subjects were questioned if any changes in their medical status or condition had occurred since their previous visit. If the subject experienced a change that was an adverse event, an Adverse Event Form was completed by the site. The number of subjects that experienced at least one study-related adverse event is reported here.
Measured: Each participant enrolled was assessed for adverse events from the time of informed consent through the 12-month follow up visit. The total assessment period was approximately 13 months for each participant.
Secondary outcomes (8)
Number of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain During Weeks 5-8 Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects During Weeks 1-4
Subjects completed daily diaries to record their average daily pain intensity scores for each qualifying region of pain (phantom limb pain and/or residual limb pain). These pain intensity questions were excerpted from the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 5 (BPI-5) on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as you can imagine. Post-amputation pain intensity scores were determined by taking the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores at baseline and over weeks 5-8 post-start of treatment for Group 1 subjects and over weeks 1-4 post-start of treatment for Group 2 subjects. Subjects that achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their qualifying area(s) of pain were considered successful. Missing diary data were replaced using the bi-weekly BPI-5 recall scores; if unavailable, the BPI-5 recall from the follow-up visit was used. The number of successes in each group is reported.
Measured: Baseline and Weeks 1-8 Post-Start of Treatment
Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment
Subjects were asked to recall and rate their average pain intensity over the past week (BPI-SF question 5) for each qualifying area of pain (phantom and/or residual limb pain) on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates no pain and 10 indicates pain as bad as you can imagine. The average pain intensity score(s) at baseline were compared to the same region(s) of pain at monthly intervals from months 3-12 post-start of treatment (SOT). Subjects that achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their qualifying area(s) of pain were considered successful. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory, but are reported with this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.
Measured: 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-months Post-SOT, and 12-months Post-SOT
Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities
Degree of post-amputation pain that interfered with 7 aspects of daily life was rated [scale (0 to 10) with higher scores indicating greater interference]. The 7 individual scores were averaged to provide an overall pain interference score. Pain interference questions (Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 9) were used for each qualifying area of pain (phantom and/or residual limb pain). Group 1 subjects: baseline average pain interference scores were compared to average pain interference scores for the same region(s) of pain at each monthly interval after the start of therapy. Group 2 subjects: baseline average pain interference scores were compared to their average score at the end of 4 weeks. Proportion of successes (subjects that experienced ≥50% reduction in average pain interference scores) is reported. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported here for ease of data entry and readability.
Measured: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOT
Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment
The Pain Disability Index (PDI) is a validated survey measuring the degree pain disrupts 7 categories of life activities on a scale from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater disability. The 7 scores were summed for each subject to provide an overall pain disability score. For Group 1 subjects, the baseline average PDI score was compared to PDI scores at monthly intervals. For Group 2 subjects, the baseline average PDI score was compared to their PDI score at the end of 4 weeks. The proportion of successes (subjects reporting ≥10 point reduction in PDI scores from baseline) are reported for Group 1 subjects. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported within this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.
Measured: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOT
Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy
The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI-II) is a validated, 21-question survey used to measure depression severity. Question are rated on a scale from 0 to 3, and the scores from each question are totaled to provide an overall score ranging between 0 to 63. Scores from 0-13 indicate minimal depression, 14-19 mild depression, 20-28 moderate depression, and 29-63 severe depression. Group 1 subjects: baseline BDI-II score was compared to BDI-II scores at monthly intervals. Group 2 subjects: baseline BDI-II score was compared to their BDI-II score at the end of 4 weeks. The percent change from baseline to each monthly interval is reported. Certain timepoints for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported within this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.
Measured: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOT
Change in Opioid Analgesic Usage From Baseline
Changes in opioid analgesic usage were calculated using morphine equivalent dosing (MED) for subjects who were using opioid analgesics at baseline. Subjects completed daily diaries in which they tracked their use of analgesic medications. For Group 1 subjects, the mean daily MED from the baseline diary was compared to the mean daily MED during week 4 and week 8. For Group 2 subjects, the daily MED from the baseline diary was compared to the daily MED during week 4 only. The median percent change from baseline is reported. Certain time points for Group 2 (i.e., after crossover) were considered exploratory but are being reported within this outcome measure for ease of data entry and readability.
Measured: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), and 8-weeks Post-SOT
Percent Change in Hours of Daily Prosthetic Usage
Subjects completed daily diaries in which they tracked the number of hours of their prosthetic usage. The 7-day mean prosthetic use was calculated for each subject from their baseline diary and compared to the 7-day mean from week 4 and week 8. The percent change from baseline was then calculated for each subject at each time point (i.e., 4-week median vs. baseline median and 8-week median vs. baseline median). A positive value indicates an increase in prosthetic usage.
Measured: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), and 8-weeks Post-SOT
Subject Satisfaction Survey
Subjects completed a sponsor-developed survey with questions pertaining to their feelings about therapy as delivered by the SPRINT Beta Stimulation System as a method for managing chronic post-amputation pain. Subjects were asked to report on their experience using the therapy. Depending on the question, subjects were asked to indicate their agreement with the question (strongly disagree, agree, neutral, disagree, strongly disagree), their comfort with the therapy (very uncomfortable, a little bit uncomfortable, fairly comfortable, very comfortable), or when pain relief was felt (immediately, a few minutes later, a few hours later, more than a day later or never). Responses are presented for key groups of questions related to the therapy whereby answer options are considered affirmative for strongly agree/agree, very easy/easy, very comfortable/comfortable.
Measured: Visit 11 (8-weeks post-Start of Treatment (SOT))
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Nov 2013 (estimated)
- Study startOct 2013
- Primary completion28 Jan 2019
- Study completion28 Jan 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Post-Amputation PainStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 28 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- SPR Therapeutics, Inc.
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- NDI Medical, LLC, United States Department of Defense
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Josh Boggs, PhD, Principal investigator, SPR Therapeutics, Inc.
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01996254
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 0123-CSP-000
- Status last verified
- Mar 2020
- First submitted
- 18 Nov 2013
- Last updated
- 26 Mar 2020
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Gilmore CA, Ilfeld BM, Rosenow JM, Li S, Desai MJ, Hunter CW, Rauck RL, Nader A, Mak J, Cohen SP, Crosby ND, Boggs JW. Percutaneous 60-day peripheral nerve stimulation implant provides sustained relief of chronic pain following amputation: 12-month follow-up of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019 Nov 17:rapm-2019-100937. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2019-100937. Online ahead of print.
PubMed 31740443Gilmore C, Ilfeld B, Rosenow J, Li S, Desai M, Hunter C, Rauck R, Kapural L, Nader A, Mak J, Cohen S, Crosby N, Boggs J. Percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation for the treatment of chronic neuropathic postamputation pain: a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019 Jun;44(6):637-645. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2018-100109. Epub 2019 Apr 5.
PubMed 30954936
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 26 Mar 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomized, Double-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Pilot Study of the SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System for the Treatment of Post-Amputation Pain
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01996254
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 0123-CSP-000
- Conditions
- Post-Amputation Pain, Phantom Limb Pain, Residual Limb Pain
- Keywords
- electrical stimulation, neurostimulation, neuromodulation, post-amputation pain, phantom limb pain, residual limb pain, neuropathic pain, amputee pain
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 28 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- SPR Therapeutics, Inc.Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Collaborators
- NDI Medical, LLC, United States Department of Defense
- Study start
- Oct 2013
- Primary completion
- 28 Jan 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 28 Jan 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 27 Nov 2013 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 26 Mar 2020
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The purpose of this study is to determine if electrical stimulation (small levels of electricity) can safely and effectively reduce post-amputation pain. This study involves a device called the SPRINT System. The SPRINT System delivers mild electrical stimulation to nerves in the residual limb. The SPRINT System includes a small wire (called a "lead") that is placed through the skin in the upper leg. It also includes a device worn on the body that delivers stimulation (called the SPRINT Stimulator).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| SPRINT Group 1 | Experimental | Device: SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) SystemSubjects in Group 1 will have a Lead placed in the residual limb in the upper leg. These subjects will then use the SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System and will receive electrical stimulation for 8 weeks. |
| SPRINT Group 2 | Sham comparator | Device: SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) SystemSubjects in Group 2 will have a Lead placed in the residual limb in the upper leg. These subjects will then use the SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System for a total of 8 weeks. They will receive 4 weeks of stimulation and 4 weeks with no stimulation. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- At least 18 years old
- Traumatic lower extremity amputation(s)
- Healed amputation and healthy residual limb based upon the investigator's evaluation
Key exclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Change of prescribed medications affecting pain within the past 4 weeks
- Compromised immune system based on medical history
- Implanted electronic device
- Bleeding disorder
- History of valvular heart disease
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) SystemAlso: SPRINT System, SPRINT, Smartpatch System, SmartpatchThe SPRINT System is an Investigational Device which delivers mild electrical stimulation to nerves in the residual limb. The SPRINT System includes a small wire (called a "Lead") that is placed through the skin in the upper leg. It also includes a device worn on the body that delivers stimulation (called the SPRINT Stimulator). | Device | SPRINT Group 1, SPRINT Group 2 |
Primary outcome
Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) and Group 2 (Control) Subjects That Achieved ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain in the First 4 Weeks of Treatment
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 1-4 Post-Start of Treatment
Subjects completed daily diaries to record their average daily pain intensity scores for each qualifying region of pain (phantom limb pain and/or residual limb pain). These pain intensity questions were excerpted from the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form Question 5 (BPI-5). The BPI-5 is an 11-point numerical rating scale where 0 represents "No Pain" and 10 represents "Pain as bad as you can imagine." Post-amputation pain intensity scores were determined for each subject by taking the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores from their diaries at Baseline compared to the mean score for the same region(s) of pain reported over 4 weeks after the Start of Treatment (i.e., the average of all diary scores during this period). Subjects that achieved ≥ 50% reduction in their qualifying area(s) of pain were considered successful. Missing diary data were replaced using 1-week BPI-5 recall; if recall scores were unavailable, baseline values were imputed.
Number of Subjects That Experienced at Least One Study-Related Adverse Event in Treatment and Control Groups
Time frame: Each participant enrolled was assessed for adverse events from the time of informed consent through the 12-month follow up visit. The total assessment period was approximately 13 months for each participant.
At each study visit following the baseline assessment at Visit 1, subjects were questioned if any changes in their medical status or condition had occurred since their previous visit. If the subject experienced a change that was an adverse event, an Adverse Event Form was completed by the site. The number of subjects that experienced at least one study-related adverse event is reported here.
8 secondary outcomes
Number of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain During Weeks 5-8 Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects During Weeks 1-4
Time frame: Baseline and Weeks 1-8 Post-Start of Treatment
Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain at Months 3-12 Post-Start of Treatment
Time frame: 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-months Post-SOT, and 12-months Post-SOT
Proportion of Subjects That Experienced ≥50% Reduction in Average Pain Interference With Daily Activities
Time frame: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOT
Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) Subjects That Experienced ≥ 10-point Reduction in Pain Disability at Monthly Intervals Post-Start of Treatment Compared to Group 2 (Control) Subjects at Week 4 Post-Start of Treatment
Time frame: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOT
Depression at Monthly Intervals After Start of Therapy
Time frame: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), 8-weeks Post-SOT, 3-months Post-SOT, 4-months Post-SOT, 5-months Post-SOT, 6-months Post-SOT, 7-months Post-SOT, 8-months Post-SOT, 9-months Post-SOT, 10-months Post-SOT, 11-mo Post-SOT, & 12-mo Post-SOT
Change in Opioid Analgesic Usage From Baseline
Time frame: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), and 8-weeks Post-SOT
Percent Change in Hours of Daily Prosthetic Usage
Time frame: Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), and 8-weeks Post-SOT
Subject Satisfaction Survey
Time frame: Visit 11 (8-weeks post-Start of Treatment (SOT))
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 26 Mar 2020.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 31740443Gilmore CA, Ilfeld BM, Rosenow JM, Li S, Desai MJ, Hunter CW, Rauck RL, Nader A, Mak J, Cohen SP, Crosby ND, Boggs JW. Percutaneous 60-day peripheral nerve stimulation implant provides sustained relief of chronic pain following amputation: 12-month follow-up of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019 Nov 17:rapm-2019-100937. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2019-100937. Online ahead of print.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30954936Gilmore C, Ilfeld B, Rosenow J, Li S, Desai M, Hunter C, Rauck R, Kapural L, Nader A, Mak J, Cohen S, Crosby N, Boggs J. Percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation for the treatment of chronic neuropathic postamputation pain: a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2019 Jun;44(6):637-645. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2018-100109. Epub 2019 Apr 5.
- Sponsor's WebsiteLink provided by the sponsor.
- Collaborator's WebsiteLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Post-Amputation Pain
RecruitingObservational study
Cryo NerVe Block Extremity AmputatioN RegIStry for Post Operative and pHantom Limb Pain
Amputation, Amputation of Lower Limb
RecruitingObservational study
Early Postoperative Pain Following a Limb Amputation
Amputation, Surgical, Pain Management
Not yet recruitingPhase 4
Role of Perineural Catheter in Pain Control and Opioid Consumption After Major Amputation of Lower Limb
Lower Limb Surgery, Pain
Not yet recruiting
Acute Post-Amputation Pain Management After Combat-Related Lower Limb Injury
Postamputation Pain, Lower Limb Amputation
Not yet recruiting
The Effect of Perioperative Intravenous Lidocaine Infusion on Post-amputation Pain in Amputee Patients
Amputation
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Josh Boggs, PhD principal investigator
SPR Therapeutics, Inc.
10 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System in people with Post-Amputation Pain and Phantom Limb Pain, run by SPR Therapeutics, Inc. at 10 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 7 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 26 Mar 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 10 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. Some participants in this study may receive a placebo. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 26 Mar 2020). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Proportion of Group 1 (Treatment) and Group 2 (Control) Subjects That Achieved ≥ 50% Reduction in All Qualifying Areas of Pain in the First 4 Weeks of Treatment (time frame: Baseline and Weeks 1-4 Post-Start of Treatment). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01996254, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 26 Mar 2020.