↓ Skip to main content

Assessing the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of subcutaneous nerve stimulation in patients with predominant back pain due to failed back surgery syndrome (SubQStim study): study protocol for a…

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, June 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
patent
2 patents

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
134 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessing the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of subcutaneous nerve stimulation in patients with predominant back pain due to failed back surgery syndrome (SubQStim study): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, June 2013
DOI 10.1186/1745-6215-14-189
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sam Eldabe, Michael Kern, Wilco Peul, Colin Green, Kristi Winterfeldt, Rod S Taylor

Abstract

Chronic radicular pain can be effectively treated with spinal cord stimulation, but this therapy is not always sufficient for chronic back pain. Subcutaneous nerve stimulation (SQS) refers to the placement of percutaneous leads in the subcutaneous tissue within the area of pain. Case series data show that failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) patients experience clinically important levels of pain relief following SQS and may also reduce their levels of analgesic therapy and experience functional well-being. However, to date, there is no randomized controlled trial evidence to support the use of SQS in FBSS.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 134 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 133 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 26 19%
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 13%
Other 13 10%
Student > Master 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Other 24 18%
Unknown 35 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 11 8%
Psychology 7 5%
Neuroscience 6 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 5 4%
Other 25 19%
Unknown 38 28%