AzTrials
AzTrials

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.

Completed

Finished. The study has ended and is not enrolling. Results may be posted on the official record.

Official record
Search all trials

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
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

Other trials in United States

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).

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 groups in NCT01996254
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
SPRINT Group 1ExperimentalSubjects 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 2Sham comparatorSubjects 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.

  1. 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

  2. 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)
  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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.

  1. First posted27 Nov 2013 (estimated)
  2. Study startOct 2013
  3. Primary completion28 Jan 2019
  4. Study completion28 Jan 2019

Resources

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)
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
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 31740443
  • Gilmore 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

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.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in