Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| NDI Medical, LLC | INDUSTRY |
| United States Department of Defense | FED |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
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).
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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. |
|
| 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. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPRINT Peripheral Nerve Stimulation (PNS) System | Device | 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). |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| 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. | 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. | 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. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| 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. |
Not provided
Key Inclusion Criteria:
Key Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Josh Boggs, PhD | SPR Therapeutics, Inc. | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arizona Pain | Scottsdale | Arizona | 85258 | United States | ||
| University of California San Diego |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 31740443 | Derived | 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. | |
| 30954936 |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Sponsor's Website | View source |
Not provided
Participants in the Initial Study Design Arm were only assessed for Safety (Adverse Events).
Recruitment began in 10-2013 (with the first subject enrolling 12-2013) and was concluded in 05-2018. Subjects were screened from a pool of candidates experiencing chronic post-amputation pain.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Initial Study Design Subjects | Subjects who were consented and enrolled under the initial design of the study. These subjects are included in the Safety Set. |
| FG001 | Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design) |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP | Yes | Yes | No | Study Protocol and Statistical Analysis Plan | Apr 6, 2017 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
|
| 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. | 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. | 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. | 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. | 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. | 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. | 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. | Visit 11 (8-weeks post-Start of Treatment (SOT)) |
| La Jolla |
| California |
| 92093 |
| United States |
| Denver Clinic for Extremities at Risk | Denver | Colorado | 80218 | United States |
| International Spine, Pain and Performance Center | Washington D.C. | District of Columbia | 20037 | United States |
| Holy Cross Hospital | Fort Lauderdale | Florida | 33334 | United States |
| Northwestern University | Chicago | Illinois | 60611 | United States |
| Walter Reed National Military Medical Center | Bethesda | Maryland | 20889 | United States |
| Premier Pain Centers | Shrewsbury | New Jersey | 07702 | United States |
| Ainsworth Institute of Pain Management | New York | New York | 10022 | United States |
| Center for Clinical Research | Winston-Salem | North Carolina | 27103 | United States |
| Derived |
| 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. |
| Collaborator's Website | View source |
Treatment Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received electrical stimulation therapy.
| FG002 | Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design) | Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy. |
| Safety Set | All subjects that underwent Lead placement |
|
| Full Analysis Set | Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement |
|
| Long Term Analysis Set | Full Analysis Set with imputed data for missed visits and exclusion due to early termination. |
|
| Per Protocol Set | Full Analysis Set with adequate diary completion, paresthesia coverage, and continued eligibility |
|
| COMPLETED |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
|
Full Analysis Set: Subjects who were consented, randomized, and met all eligibility criteria prior to Lead placement
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design) | Treatment Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received electrical stimulation therapy. |
| BG001 | Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design) | Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy. |
| BG002 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Standard Deviation | Years |
| |||||||||||||||
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Race (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Body Mass Index | Height was not collected for 1 of the 12 (Group 1) participants so BMI was not able to be calculated for that participant. This accounts for the difference in number analyzed in this row from the 26 overall. | Median | Full Range | kg per square meter |
| ||||||||||||||
| Time Since Amputation | Median | Full Range | Years |
| |||||||||||||||
| Baseline Beck Depression Inventory Score | The Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), version II is a survey used to measure depression severity. Scores from 0-13 indicate minimal depression, 14-19 mild depression, 20-28 moderate depression, and 29-63 severe depression. The score range is 0 to 63. | Median | Full Range | units on a scale |
| ||||||||||||||
| Location of Amputation | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Side of Amputation | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | 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. | Full Analysis Set: Subjects who were consented, randomized, and met all eligibility criteria prior to Lead placement | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Baseline and Weeks 1-4 Post-Start of Treatment |
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Primary | 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. | Safety Set: All subjects that underwent Lead placement. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 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 | 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. | Full Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Baseline and Weeks 1-8 Post-Start of Treatment |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | 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. | Long Term Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement with imputed data for missed visits. Covarities in the imputation model included age, gender, ethnicity, race, time since amputation, location of amputation, and baseline average pain intensity score(s). | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 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 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | 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. | Long Term Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement with imputed data for missed visits. Covarities in the imputation model included age, gender, ethnicity, race, time since amputation, location of amputation, and baseline average pain intensity score(s). | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 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 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | 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. | Full Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | 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 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | 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. | Full Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement. | Posted | Median | Full Range | percent change | 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 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | 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. | Full Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement. Only the 9 subjects that were using opioid analgesics at baseline were included in the analysis. | Posted | Median | Full Range | percent change | Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), and 8-weeks Post-SOT |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | 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. | Full Analysis Set: Subjects from the Revised Study Design that enrolled and met all eligibility prior to Lead placement. | Posted | Median | Full Range | percent change | Baseline, 4-weeks Post-Start of Treatment (SOT), and 8-weeks Post-SOT |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | 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. | Of the 28 total subjects, 14 subjects that used one version of the stimulator (Sprint Beta) were asked to complete subject surveys and 6 of the 14 responded. Results are presented for the 6 surveys. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Visit 11 (8-weeks post-Start of Treatment (SOT)) |
|
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.
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Initial Study Design Subjects | Subjects who were consented and enrolled under the initial design of the study. | 0 | 5 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5 |
| EG001 | Group 1 (Treatment Group, Revised Study Design) | Treatment Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received electrical stimulation therapy. | 0 | 14 | 1 | 14 | 8 | 14 |
| EG002 | Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design) | Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy. | 0 | 14 | 1 | 14 | 10 | 14 |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Car accident | Social circumstances | Systematic Assessment | Not study-related |
| |
| Patellar Fracture | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study-related |
| |
| Gallstones | Gastrointestinal disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study-related |
| |
| Leg Pain/Neuropathy | Nervous system disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study-related |
| |
| Pleuritic Pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study-related |
|
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Diarrhea | Gastrointestinal disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
| |
| Nausea | Gastrointestinal disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
| |
| Tiredness/Fatigue | General disorders | Systematic Assessment | One event was study related, and the other was not |
| |
| Cold/Flu/Sinus infection | General disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
| |
| Pain | General disorders | Systematic Assessment | Unable to determine relationship |
| |
| Broken bone | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
| |
| Back pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
| |
| Pain and tenderness from procedure | Product Issues | Systematic Assessment | Study related |
| |
| Unpleasant painful stimulation | Product Issues | Systematic Assessment | Study related |
| |
| Urinary tract infection | Renal and urinary disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
| |
| Bronchitis | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
| |
| Upper respiratory infection | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
| |
| Itching irritation or bruising from SPRINT pads | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment | Study related |
| |
| Skin irritation/redness at Lead exit site | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment | Study related |
| |
| Itching or irritation from bandages and/or belt | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment | Study related |
| |
| Non-specified skin irritation | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment | One event was study related, and the other was not |
| |
| Blister/abcess | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
| |
| Surgery | Surgical and medical procedures | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
| |
| Fall | Social circumstances | Systematic Assessment | Not study related |
|
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Clinical Affairs | SPR Therapeutics, Inc. | 216-378-9108 | support@SPRTherapeutics.com |
| Feb 21, 2020 |
| Prot_SAP_000.pdf |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010591 | Phantom Limb |
| D009437 | Neuralgia |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010468 | Perceptual Disorders |
| D019954 | Neurobehavioral Manifestations |
| D009461 | Neurologic Manifestations |
| D009422 | Nervous System Diseases |
| D010149 | Pain, Postoperative |
| D011183 | Postoperative Complications |
| D010335 | Pathologic Processes |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
| D012816 | Signs and Symptoms |
| D010146 | Pain |
| D010523 | Peripheral Nervous System Diseases |
| D009468 | Neuromuscular Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D016503 | Drug Delivery Systems |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D004358 | Drug Therapy |
| D013812 | Therapeutics |
Not provided
Not provided
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy.
|
|
| Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design) |
Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy. |
|
|
| OG001 | Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design) | Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy. |
|
|
Treatment Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received electrical stimulation therapy. |
| OG001 | Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design) | Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy. |
|
|
| OG001 | Group 2 (Control Group, Revised Study Design) | Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy. |
|
|
Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy. |
|
|
|
|
| Units |
|---|
| Counts |
|---|
| Participants |
|
|
Control Group subjects were consented and enrolled under the revised study design. These subjects had at least one Lead placed and received sham stimulation therapy.
|
|