Search

Objectives: Pet ownership has been shown to decrease morbidity and mortality in several aspects of health but has not been studied in chronic pain patients. We evaluate whether subjects who underwent spinal cord stimulation (SCS) and own a pet have improved outcomes compared to non-pet owners., Methods: After obtaining IRB approval, we re-contacted 38 subjects who underwent SCS surgery with preoperative and 1-year postoperative data on Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Beck Depression Inventory (BDI), and Pain Catastrophizing scale (PCS). We examined influence of pets and pet ownership-specific behaviors on improvement in SCS outcomes., Results: Patients included 24 males/14 females with a mean age of 59.9 ± 11.5 years. At mean follow-up of 12.2 months (range 10-14), there were improvements in NRS, ODI, BDI, PCS and MPQ. Twenty subjects owned pets and 18 did not; all believed pet ownership could improve health. Pet owners improved more on NRS-right now (p = 0.05) and BDI (p = 0.05), and were more satisfied with SCS (p = 0.04). No significant improvement was seen in ODI, MPQ, or PCS. However, PCS did improve in pet owners who exercised their pet (PCS-total, p < 0.01; PCS-helplessness, p < 0.01; PCS-rumination, p = 0.05; PCS-magnification, p = 0.02)., Conclusions: We provide preliminary evidence that pet ownership is associated with improved pain, depression and SCS satisfaction. Exercising with a pet also appears to be beneficial in limiting pain catastrophizing. Pets show promise as a novel means to improve patient SCS outcomes., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective Generator site pain is a relatively common phenomenon in patients undergoing spinal cord stimulation (SCS) that complicates management and effective pain relief. This pain may be managed conservatively, with repositioning of the battery and, in some cases, with explant. Here we explore our experience with management of generator site pain ("pocket pain") in a large single-center study. Methods All SCS permanent implants and implantable pulse generator (IPG) placements over 9 years were reviewed. Of 785 cases, we identified 43 patients with pocket pain (5.5%). Demographics and treatments of the pocket pain cohort were analyzed. Results The mean age (± SEM) of the pocket pain cohort was 46.86 ± 1.06, and there were 10/33 males/females. Females were overrepresented in pocket pain cohort (76.7%) when compared with the total SCS cohort (59.0%) (X2 = 5.93, P  = 0.015). Diagnosis included failed back surgery syndrome (51.2%), complex regional pain syndrome (23.3%), and chronic neuropathic pain (25.5%). No patients improved with conservative therapy. All patients either went on to revision (n  = 23) or explant (n  = 20). Time from initial surgery to development of pocket pain was 7.5 months (range: 0.3–88) and from pocket pain to revision surgery was 4.5 months (range: 0.4–26). In addition, significantly more pocket pain patients (65.1%) had workers' compensation (WC) insurance compared with patients without pocket pain (24.9%) (X2 = 33.3, P  < 0.001). Conclusion In our institutional experience, pocket pain was inadequately managed with conservative treatments. Being female and having SCS filed under WC increased risk of pocket pain. Future work will explore the nuances in device placement based on body shape and manual activity responsibilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]