Spinal Cord Injury Community Personal Opinions and Perspectives on Spinal Cord Stimulation

Top Spinal Cord Inj Rehabil, 2023 · DOI: 10.46292/sci22-00057 · Published: July 1, 2023

Spinal Cord Injury Neurology Public Health

Simple Explanation

This study explores the opinions and preferences of people living with spinal cord injury (SCI) regarding spinal cord stimulation (SCS). The aim was to gather insights that can improve the design, delivery, and translation of SCS therapies, ensuring they align with the priorities of the SCI community. An online survey was conducted to collect data on participants' priorities for recovery, their expectations regarding the benefits of SCS, their tolerance for risks, and their interest in different types of SCS, such as transcutaneous (TCSCS) and epidural SCS (ESCS). The survey found that individuals with tetraplegia prioritized fine motor skills and upper body function, while those with paraplegia focused on standing, walking, and bowel function. Participants also highlighted the importance of bowel and bladder care and reducing reliance on caregivers.

Study Duration

February to May 2020

Participants

223 individuals living with SCI

Evidence Level

Not specified

Key Findings

1
Individuals with tetraplegia prioritized fine motor skills and upper body function, while those with paraplegia prioritized standing, walking, and bowel function.
2
Meaningful benefits from SCS therapy considered most important were performing bowel and bladder care, less reliance on caregivers, and maintaining physical health.
3
The most significant risks respondents were concerned about included further loss of function and increased neuropathic pain.

Research Summary

This study aimed to gather input from people living with SCI regarding their priorities, preferences, and concerns related to spinal cord stimulation (SCS). The survey results indicated varying priorities based on the level and severity of SCI, with tetraplegia patients focusing on upper extremity function and paraplegia patients focusing on mobility and bowel function. Bowel and bladder function were universally important. The study highlights the importance of incorporating the perspectives of individuals with SCI into the design and implementation of SCS clinical trials and emphasizes the need to address barriers to participation, such as relocation and expenses.

Practical Implications

Improved Clinical Trial Design

Researchers can use the survey results to design more relevant and patient-centered clinical trials for SCS by aligning the trials with the priorities and preferences of individuals with SCI.

Enhanced Participant Recruitment

Addressing concerns such as awareness of SCS, ease of participation, and perceived potential risks can improve participant recruitment in clinical trials.

Informed Decision-Making

Clinical, regulatory, and reimbursement decision-making bodies can benefit from these results when translating SCS technology into clinical practice, ensuring that the technology is feasible, relevant, applicable, and impactful to the SCI community.

Study Limitations

1
The study utilized an online survey, so the respondents and their responses may not be representative of all individuals who have an interest in SCS
2
Individuals who already had an interest in SCS may have been more likely to complete this survey.
3
The responses may not accurately reflect the entire population of people who are living with SCI.

Your Feedback

Was this summary helpful?

Back to Spinal Cord Injury