Phantom Limb PainNCT05392803
Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields for Post-Amputation Pain
A study of Phantom Limb Pain and Residual Limb Pain, run by University of California, San Diego at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy is a possible method of pain control involving the application of electromagnetic energy (also termed nonthermal, pulsed, shortwave radiofrequency therapy). Food and Drug Administration-cleared devices have been in clinical use for over 70 years. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Phantom Limb Pain, Residual Limb Pain
- Could I receive a placebo?
- Yes, some participants may receive a placebo
- How many people
- 14 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 5 Aug 2022to 17 Aug 2023
- 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
- adult patients of at least 18 years of age [19 years in Alabama and Nebraska]
- with an upper or lower limb amputation at least 12 weeks prior to enrollment distal to the shoulder or hip (femoral head remaining), respectively, and including at least one metacarpal or metatarsal bone, respectively
- experience at least moderate residual and/or phantom limb pain-defined as a 3 or higher on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS; 0-10, 0= no pain; 10=worst imaginable pain)-at least daily for the previous 2 months
- willing to avoid both changes to their analgesic regimen as well as elective surgical procedures for 70 days after initiation of treatment with PEMF therapy
Who cannot join
- concurrent use of an implanted pulse generator (e.g., cardiac pacemaker)
- pregnancy
- incarceration
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
Univerity of California San Diego
San Diego, California, 92103
About this study
Official title: Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields for Post-Amputation Pain: A Randomized, Triple-Masked, Sham-Controlled, Crossover Pilot Study
Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy is a possible method of pain control involving the application of electromagnetic energy (also termed nonthermal, pulsed, shortwave radiofrequency therapy). Food and Drug Administration-cleared devices have been in clinical use for over 70 years. For decades, available devices consisted of a large signal generator and bulky coil applicator that were not portable and produced significant electromagnetic interference, making them impractical for common use. However, small, lightweight, relatively inexpensive, noninvasive, Food and Drug Administration-cleared devices that function for 30 days are now available to treat acute and chronic pain, decrease inflammation and edema, and hasten wound healing and bone regeneration. Therefore, it has the potential to concurrently improve analgesia and decrease or even negate opioid requirements, only without the limitations of opioids and peripheral nerve blocks. The purpose of this pilot study is to explore the possibility of treating chronic post-amputation pain with nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy, optimize the study protocol, and estimate the treatment effect in preparation for developing subsequent definitive clinical trials.
Read the detailed description
The proposed study will be a randomized, participant- and observer-masked, sham-controlled, crossover, human participants pilot study with two primary aims:
Specific Aim 1: To determine the feasibility and optimize the protocol for subsequent clinical trials that will compare the addition of nonthermal, pulsed shortwave therapy to usual and customary analgesia for post-amputation phantom and residual limb pain.
Specific Aim 2: To estimate the treatment effect of adding nonthermal, pulsed shortwave therapy to usual and customary analgesia for post-amputation phantom and residual limb pain. This will provide an idea of the optimal amputee characteristics amenable to this analgesic technique and allow determination of the required sample sizes of subsequent definitive clinical trials.
Hypothesis: Nonthermal, pulsed shortwave therapy will decrease pain in the 28 days following application for post-amputation pain.
This will be a single-center (University of California San Diego), randomized, participant- and observer-masked, sham-controlled, crossover human subjects pilot study.
Enrollment. Participants will be consenting adults experiencing post-amputation phantom and/or residual limb pain. Study inclusion will be proposed after an amputee contacts the investigators. If an individual desires study participation, written, informed consent will be obtained using a current University of California San Diego Institutional Review Board-approved informed consent form. The study population of interest includes adult women and men of all races, ethnicity, sexual identity, and socioeconomic status.
Procedures. Following written, informed consent, we will record baseline anthropometric information (age, sex, height, weight, amputation details and current pain levels).
Treatment Group Assignment. Each participant will be randomized to one of two treatment groups: Active or Sham treatment. There are sham devices produced that are identical to active devices, only they do not deliver pulsed electromagnetic energy. Randomization will be in block sizes of 2. The computer-generated randomization lists will be created by the University of California San Diego Investigational Drug Service in a 1:1 treatment group ratio using opaque envelopes. The active and sham devices are indistinguishable in appearance, and therefore investigators, participants, and all clinical staff other than the individual who opens the randomization envelope and chooses a sham or active device will be masked to treatment group assignment for the duration of the data collection period. An Investigational Drug Service pharmacist will open the envelope and provide the investigators with the appropriate device, keeping all investigators masked to treatment group assignment. Upon completion of data collection, the pharmacist will provide the investigators with a masked list of the treatment groups (e.g., "Treatment A" and "Treatment B"), and the active/sham lists only following analysis for that subgroup, resulting in a triple-masked study (investigators, participants, statistician).
Study intervention. The pulsed shortwave devices used are over-the-counter (Model 088, BioElectronics, Frederick, Maryland) and 2 devices (both the same treatment group) will be shipped to the patient either in or out of California who will then contact an investigator for assistance in self-placement of the device on the residual limb. The optimal location to treat phantom pain is currently unknown and will partially informed by the results of this pilot study, and patients will be encouraged to move the devices to a new anatomic location every two days until relief is experienced.
Supplemental analgesics. In addition to the pulsed shortwave device(s), participants will receive standard-of-care supplemental analgesics which can include acetaminophen, ibuprofen, ketorolac, opioids, gabapentin (this is provider- and patient-dependent). Therefore, all patients of this study-regardless of the treatment arm they are randomized to-will continue to receive current usual and customary analgesia: all will receive the same combination of supplemental analgesics they would regardless of study participation. Participants will be provided with verbal and written instructions, and the telephone and pager numbers of an investigator available during business hours throughout the treatment period. Participants can shower with the device in place, but not submerge it during swimming or a bath, as advised by the manufacturer.
Amputees will return their initial devices in pre-addressed and -stamped envelopes that we provide. They will be sent a second device which is the opposite treatment of the initial device: participants who initially received sham will subsequently receive active, and vice versa. These will be applied on (approximately) Day 35 and the same protocol will be repeated as for the initial device, with additional data collected for 35 days after placement of the second device. The second device will be discarded in the trash.
Of note, if a device is reported lost or nonfunctional during the study, it will be replaced by the investigators by mail if more than 7 days of treatment remain.
Primary end points: This is an exploratory pilot study to assist in planning subsequent definitive trials and we therefore have no data analysis plan. We will enroll a convenience sample of up to 40 participants. The outcome measures of primary interest will be (1) the change in "average" residual and phantom limb pain scores between baseline and Day 28 of the initial treatment, as well as (2) the Patient Global Impression of Change on Day 28 of the initial treatment.
- Conditions
- Phantom Limb Pain, Residual Limb Pain
- Being tested
- Active then Sham Treatment, Sham then Active Treatment
- Medical subject headings
- Phantom Limb
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Active then Sham TreatmentDevice
Also called nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy then sham, pulsed electromagnetic fields therapy then sham
Application of 30 days of nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy; then sham treatment after a 7-day "washout" period
Sham then Active TreatmentDevice
Also called Sham then nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy, Sham then pulsed electromagnetic fields therapy
Application of 30 days of sham treatment; then 30 days of nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy after a 7-day "washout" period
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Active then Sham Treatment | Experimental | Application of 30 days of nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy, 7 day "washout", 30 days of sham. Receives: Device: Active then Sham Treatment |
| Sham then Active Treatment | Experimental | Application of 30 days of a nonfunctional sham device, 7 day "washout", then 30 days of nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy Receives: Device: Sham then Active Treatment |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Change in Average RESIDUAL Limb Pain Scores Between Baseline and Day 28 of the Initial Treatment as Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will be the difference between the baseline and Day 28 timepoints.
Measured: Baseline and Day 28
Change in Average PHANTOM Limb Pain Scores Between Baseline and Day 28 of the Initial Treatment as Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will be the difference between the baseline and Day 28 timepoints.
Measured: Baseline and Day 28
Patient Global Impression of Change for RESIDUAL Limb Pain Between Baseline and Day 28 of the Initial Treatment
A 7-point Likert scale with 1 equivalent to "much worse", 4 equivalent to "no change", and 7 equivalent to "much improved". Patients compare their current pain level with baseline using this scale.
Measured: Day 28
Patient Global Impression of Change for PHANTOM Limb Pain Between Baseline and Day 28 of the Initial Treatment
A 7-point Likert scale with 1 equivalent to "much worse", 4 equivalent to "no change", and 7 equivalent to "much improved". Patients compare their current pain level with baseline using this scale.
Measured: Day 28
Secondary outcomes (15)
Patient Global Impression of Change for RESIDUAL Limb Pain
A 7-point Likert scale with 1 equivalent to "much worse", 4 equivalent to "no change", and 7 equivalent to "much improved". Patients compare their current pain level with baseline using this scale.
Measured: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Patient Global Impression of Change for PHANTOM Limb Pain
A 7-point Likert scale with 1 equivalent to "much worse", 4 equivalent to "no change", and 7 equivalent to "much improved". Patients compare their current pain level with baseline using this scale.
Measured: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Change in AVERAGE RESIDUAL Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will the difference between the baseline and current pain level measured with the Numeric Rating Scale
Measured: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Change in WORST RESIDUAL Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will the difference between the baseline and current pain level measured with the Numeric Rating Scale
Measured: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Change in LEAST RESIDUAL Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will the difference between the baseline and current pain level measured with the Numeric Rating Scale
Measured: Days 28 and 35
Change in CURRENT RESIDUAL Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will the difference between the baseline and current pain level measured with the Numeric Rating Scale
Measured: Days 28 and 35
Change in AVERAGE PHANTOM Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will the difference between the baseline and current pain level measured with the Numeric Rating Scale
Measured: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Change in WORST PHANTOM Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will the difference between the baseline and current pain level measured with the Numeric Rating Scale
Measured: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Change in LEAST PHANTOM Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will the difference between the baseline and current pain level measured with the Numeric Rating Scale
Measured: Days 28 and 35
Change in CURRENT PHANTOM Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will the difference between the baseline and current pain level measured with the Numeric Rating Scale
Measured: Days 28 and 35
As-needed (Non-scheduled) Analgesic Use
Patient's perception of requirements over the previous 24 hours of as-needed (non-scheduled) analgesic use
Measured: Inquired on Day 2, 4, 7, 21, 28 and 35 for both initial and crossover treatments
Brief Pain Inventory, Short Form (Interference Sub Scale)
The Brief pain Inventory (short form) is an instrument specifically designed to assess pain and its impact on physical and emotional functioning. The brief Inventory is comprised of three domains: (1) pain, with four questions involving "worst", "average" and "current" pain levels using a 0-10 numeric rating scale [we are not using]; (2) percentage of relief provided by pain treatments with one question [we are not using] and, (3) interference with 7 questions involving physical and emotional functioning using a 0-10 Likert scale [0=no interference (good); 10=complete interference (bad)]: general activity, mood, walking ability, normal work, relations with other people, sleep and enjoyment of life. This outcome will include the interference subscale: 0=no interference (good); 70=complete interference (bad)
Measured: Inquired on Days 28 and 35
Awakenings Due to Pain the Previous Evening
The number of awakenings due to pain that occurred the previous evening
Measured: Inquired on Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Does Patient Want to Continue Using Device (Participants Answering "Yes")?
Does the patient want to continue using device answered as "yes" or "no". "Yes" means they DO want to continue using the device, while "no" means they do NOT want to continue using the device.
Measured: Inquired on Day 35
Device Location Changes
If a patient moves the anatomic location of one or both of the intervention devices (and where the device is moved to) since the last contact
Measured: Inquired on Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28 and 35
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 May 2022
- Study start5 Aug 2022
- Primary completion10 Aug 2023
- Study completion17 Aug 2023
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.
- Other trials for Phantom Limb 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
- Crossover
- Model description
- Participants will be randomized to either active or sham treatment for 30 days; and will then crossover and receive the alternative treatment for 30 additional days. The primary analysis will compare the initially-randomized active and sham treatment groups--thus, a parallel group (inter-participant) comparison; but secondary analyses will compare intra-participant changes as well.
- Masking
- Quadruple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 14 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San Diego
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Brian M. Ilfeld, MD, MS, University of California, San Diego
- Investigators
- Brian Ilfeld, MD, MS, Principal investigator, University of California, San Diego
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05392803
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PEMF Amputee Pilot
- Status last verified
- Sep 2024
- First submitted
- 19 May 2022
- Last updated
- 19 Sep 2024
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 19 Sep 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields for Post-Amputation Pain: A Randomized, Triple-Masked, Sham-Controlled, Crossover Pilot Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05392803
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PEMF Amputee Pilot
- Conditions
- Phantom Limb Pain, Residual Limb Pain
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 14 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of California, San DiegoUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 5 Aug 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 10 Aug 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 17 Aug 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 May 2022 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 19 Sep 2024
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy is a possible method of pain control involving the application of electromagnetic energy (also termed nonthermal, pulsed, shortwave radiofrequency therapy). Food and Drug Administration-cleared devices have been in clinical use for over 70 years. For decades, available devices consisted of a large signal generator and bulky coil applicator that were not portable and produced significant electromagnetic interference, making them impractical for common use. However, small, lightweight, relatively inexpensive, noninvasive, Food and Drug Administration-cleared devices that function for 30 days are now available to treat acute and chronic pain, decrease inflammation and edema, and hasten wound healing and bone regeneration. Therefore, it has the potential to concurrently improve analgesia and decrease or even negate opioid requirements, only without the limitations of opioids and peripheral nerve blocks. The purpose of this pilot study is to explore the possibility of treating chronic post-amputation pain with nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy, optimize the study protocol, and estimate the treatment effect in preparation for developing subsequent definitive clinical trials.
Detailed description
The proposed study will be a randomized, participant- and observer-masked, sham-controlled, crossover, human participants pilot study with two primary aims:
Specific Aim 1: To determine the feasibility and optimize the protocol for subsequent clinical trials that will compare the addition of nonthermal, pulsed shortwave therapy to usual and customary analgesia for post-amputation phantom and residual limb pain.
Specific Aim 2: To estimate the treatment effect of adding nonthermal, pulsed shortwave therapy to usual and customary analgesia for post-amputation phantom and residual limb pain. This will provide an idea of the optimal amputee characteristics amenable to this analgesic technique and allow determination of the required sample sizes of subsequent definitive clinical trials.
Hypothesis: Nonthermal, pulsed shortwave therapy will decrease pain in the 28 days following application for post-amputation pain.
This will be a single-center (University of California San Diego), randomized, participant- and observer-masked, sham-controlled, crossover human subjects pilot study.
Enrollment. Participants will be consenting adults experiencing post-amputation phantom and/or residual limb pain. Study inclusion will be proposed after an amputee contacts the investigators. If an individual desires study participation, written, informed consent will be obtained using a current University of California San Diego Institutional Review Board-approved informed consent form. The study population of interest includes adult women and men of all races, ethnicity, sexual identity, and socioeconomic status.
Procedures. Following written, informed consent, we will record baseline anthropometric information (age, sex, height, weight, amputation details and current pain levels).
Treatment Group Assignment. Each participant will be randomized to one of two treatment groups: Active or Sham treatment. There are sham devices produced that are identical to active devices, only they do not deliver pulsed electromagnetic energy. Randomization will be in block sizes of 2. The computer-generated randomization lists will be created by the University of California San Diego Investigational Drug Service in a 1:1 treatment group ratio using opaque envelopes. The active and sham devices are indistinguishable in appearance, and therefore investigators, participants, and all clinical staff other than the individual who opens the randomization envelope and chooses a sham or active device will be masked to treatment group assignment for the duration of the data collection period. An Investigational Drug Service pharmacist will open the envelope and provide the investigators with the appropriate device, keeping all investigators masked to treatment group assignment. Upon completion of data collection, the pharmacist will provide the investigators with a masked list of the treatment groups (e.g., "Treatment A" and "Treatment B"), and the active/sham lists only following analysis for that subgroup, resulting in a triple-masked study (investigators, participants, statistician).
Study intervention. The pulsed shortwave devices used are over-the-counter (Model 088, BioElectronics, Frederick, Maryland) and 2 devices (both the same treatment group) will be shipped to the patient either in or out of California who will then contact an investigator for assistance in self-placement of the device on the residual limb. The optimal location to treat phantom pain is currently unknown and will partially informed by the results of this pilot study, and patients will be encouraged to move the devices to a new anatomic location every two days until relief is experienced.
Supplemental analgesics. In addition to the pulsed shortwave device(s), participants will receive standard-of-care supplemental analgesics which can include acetaminophen, ibuprofen, ketorolac, opioids, gabapentin (this is provider- and patient-dependent). Therefore, all patients of this study-regardless of the treatment arm they are randomized to-will continue to receive current usual and customary analgesia: all will receive the same combination of supplemental analgesics they would regardless of study participation. Participants will be provided with verbal and written instructions, and the telephone and pager numbers of an investigator available during business hours throughout the treatment period. Participants can shower with the device in place, but not submerge it during swimming or a bath, as advised by the manufacturer.
Amputees will return their initial devices in pre-addressed and -stamped envelopes that we provide. They will be sent a second device which is the opposite treatment of the initial device: participants who initially received sham will subsequently receive active, and vice versa. These will be applied on (approximately) Day 35 and the same protocol will be repeated as for the initial device, with additional data collected for 35 days after placement of the second device. The second device will be discarded in the trash.
Of note, if a device is reported lost or nonfunctional during the study, it will be replaced by the investigators by mail if more than 7 days of treatment remain.
Primary end points: This is an exploratory pilot study to assist in planning subsequent definitive trials and we therefore have no data analysis plan. We will enroll a convenience sample of up to 40 participants. The outcome measures of primary interest will be (1) the change in "average" residual and phantom limb pain scores between baseline and Day 28 of the initial treatment, as well as (2) the Patient Global Impression of Change on Day 28 of the initial treatment.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Participants will be randomized to either active or sham treatment for 30 days; and will then crossover and receive the alternative treatment for 30 additional days. The primary analysis will compare the initially-randomized active and sham treatment groups--thus, a parallel group (inter-participant) comparison; but secondary analyses will compare intra-participant changes as well.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Active then Sham Treatment | Experimental | Device: Active then Sham TreatmentApplication of 30 days of nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy, 7 day "washout", 30 days of sham. |
| Sham then Active Treatment | Experimental | Device: Sham then Active TreatmentApplication of 30 days of a nonfunctional sham device, 7 day "washout", then 30 days of nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- adult patients of at least 18 years of age [19 years in Alabama and Nebraska]
- with an upper or lower limb amputation at least 12 weeks prior to enrollment distal to the shoulder or hip (femoral head remaining), respectively, and including at least one metacarpal or metatarsal bone, respectively
- experience at least moderate residual and/or phantom limb pain-defined as a 3 or higher on the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS; 0-10, 0= no pain; 10=worst imaginable pain)-at least daily for the previous 2 months
- willing to avoid both changes to their analgesic regimen as well as elective surgical procedures for 70 days after initiation of treatment with PEMF therapy
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- concurrent use of an implanted pulse generator (e.g., cardiac pacemaker)
- pregnancy
- incarceration
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Active then Sham TreatmentAlso: nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy then sham, pulsed electromagnetic fields therapy then shamApplication of 30 days of nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy; then sham treatment after a 7-day "washout" period | Device | Active then Sham Treatment |
| Sham then Active TreatmentAlso: Sham then nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy, Sham then pulsed electromagnetic fields therapyApplication of 30 days of sham treatment; then 30 days of nonthermal, pulsed shortwave (radiofrequency) therapy after a 7-day "washout" period | Device | Sham then Active Treatment |
Primary outcome
Change in Average RESIDUAL Limb Pain Scores Between Baseline and Day 28 of the Initial Treatment as Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Baseline and Day 28
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will be the difference between the baseline and Day 28 timepoints.
Change in Average PHANTOM Limb Pain Scores Between Baseline and Day 28 of the Initial Treatment as Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Baseline and Day 28
The numeric rating scale is a 0-10 Likert scale measuring pain level with 0 = no pain and 10 = worst imaginable pain scale. The outcome will be the difference between the baseline and Day 28 timepoints.
Patient Global Impression of Change for RESIDUAL Limb Pain Between Baseline and Day 28 of the Initial Treatment
Time frame: Day 28
A 7-point Likert scale with 1 equivalent to "much worse", 4 equivalent to "no change", and 7 equivalent to "much improved". Patients compare their current pain level with baseline using this scale.
Patient Global Impression of Change for PHANTOM Limb Pain Between Baseline and Day 28 of the Initial Treatment
Time frame: Day 28
A 7-point Likert scale with 1 equivalent to "much worse", 4 equivalent to "no change", and 7 equivalent to "much improved". Patients compare their current pain level with baseline using this scale.
15 secondary outcomes
Patient Global Impression of Change for RESIDUAL Limb Pain
Time frame: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Patient Global Impression of Change for PHANTOM Limb Pain
Time frame: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Change in AVERAGE RESIDUAL Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Change in WORST RESIDUAL Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Change in LEAST RESIDUAL Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Days 28 and 35
Change in CURRENT RESIDUAL Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Days 28 and 35
Change in AVERAGE PHANTOM Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Change in WORST PHANTOM Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Change in LEAST PHANTOM Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Days 28 and 35
Change in CURRENT PHANTOM Pain From Baseline Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale
Time frame: Days 28 and 35
As-needed (Non-scheduled) Analgesic Use
Time frame: Inquired on Day 2, 4, 7, 21, 28 and 35 for both initial and crossover treatments
Brief Pain Inventory, Short Form (Interference Sub Scale)
Time frame: Inquired on Days 28 and 35
Awakenings Due to Pain the Previous Evening
Time frame: Inquired on Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28, and 35
Does Patient Want to Continue Using Device (Participants Answering "Yes")?
Time frame: Inquired on Day 35
Device Location Changes
Time frame: Inquired on Days 2, 4, 7, 21, 28 and 35
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 19 Sep 2024.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Phantom Limb Pain
Recruiting
TENS for Restoring Somatotopic Sensory Feedback in Lower Limb Amputees and Improving Phantom Limb Perception
Lower Limb Amputation Above Knee, Lower Limb Amputation Below Knee
Recruiting
Target Muscle Re-innervation and Regenerative Peripheral Nerve Interfaces Alone and in Combination for the Treatment of Residual and Phantom Limb Pain in Cancer Patients Who Have Received an Amputation
Amputation
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
Psilocybin-assisted Therapy for Phantom Limb Pain
Phantom Limb Pain
Recruiting
Home-based Rehabilitation Intervention for Phantom Limb Pain in Veterans With Lower Limb Amputations
Phantom Limb Pain
RecruitingObservational study
Prospective Study of Sensation and Satisfaction in Cancer and Transgender Mastectomy Patients
Sensation Disorders, Sensation, Phantom
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.
Brian Ilfeld, MD, MS principal investigator
University of California, San Diego
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study of Phantom Limb Pain and Residual Limb Pain, run by University of California, San Diego at 1 site 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 4 inclusion and 3 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 19 Sep 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site 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. 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 19 Sep 2024). 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?
Change in Average RESIDUAL Limb Pain Scores Between Baseline and Day 28 of the Initial Treatment as Measured With the Numeric Rating Scale (time frame: Baseline and Day 28). The study lists 4 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 19 Sep 2024.