Pilot Study of PEMF Therapy in Treatment of Post-operative Pain Following Total Knee Arthroplasty
NCT ID: NCT02211534
Last Updated: 2017-10-27
Study Results
Outcome measurements, participant flow, baseline characteristics, and adverse events have been published for this study.
View full resultsBasic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
NA
35 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2014-09-30
2016-03-31
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Keywords
Explore important study keywords that can help with search, categorization, and topic discovery.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
TRIPLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Device
Pulsed Electromagnetic Field therapy device; self-administered at home twice daily for 30 minutes.
Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Device (Provant)
The PEMF device delivers non-thermal, non-ionizing pulsed electromagnetic energy to the target tissue, using 27.12 megahertz pulses lasting 42 microseconds and delivered 1000 times per second. The system generates an electromagnetic field that is continuously monitored and regulated to ensure consistent dosing. The therapeutic electromagnetic field is delivered by means of an applicator pad that is placed against the treatment site. The active and sham devices will be identical in appearance and all other physical characteristics in order to maintain the masking of the treatment.
Sham Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Device
Inactive Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Therapy device; self-administered at home twice daily for 30 minutes.
Sham Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Device
The Sham device will be identical in appearance, physical characteristics and operation to the Active device.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Device (Provant)
The PEMF device delivers non-thermal, non-ionizing pulsed electromagnetic energy to the target tissue, using 27.12 megahertz pulses lasting 42 microseconds and delivered 1000 times per second. The system generates an electromagnetic field that is continuously monitored and regulated to ensure consistent dosing. The therapeutic electromagnetic field is delivered by means of an applicator pad that is placed against the treatment site. The active and sham devices will be identical in appearance and all other physical characteristics in order to maintain the masking of the treatment.
Sham Pulsed Electromagnetic Field Device
The Sham device will be identical in appearance, physical characteristics and operation to the Active device.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Subject has undergone a total knee replacement for the treatment of osteoarthritis, and has persistent post-operative pain in the index knee for \> 3 months and \< 36 months following surgery.
3. Subject has been receiving medication for persistent post-operative knee pain, including opioid or non-opioid analgesic medication that is administered on an "as needed" (prn) basis, and is on a stable analgesic dosing regimen (i.e. the same medications and dosages) for \> 30 days prior to the screening visit.
4. Mean Pain Intensity (calculated as the mean of the daily average pain intensity scores) is ≥3 and \< 9 as measured on Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) during the run-in phase.
5. Subject has completed a minimum of 80% (8 of 10 possible) of the pain intensity assessments during the run-in phase.
6. Subject is willing and able to wear an activity meter from the screening visit through Day 75.
7. Subject is able to access an internet browser in the home environment.
8. Subject is willing and able to give written informed consent and to comply with all parts of the study protocol.
9. Female Subjects must be post menopausal, surgically sterile, abstinent, or practicing (or agree to practice) an effective method of birth control if they are sexually active for the duration of the study. (Effective methods of birth control include prescription hormonal contraceptives, intrauterine devices, double-barrier methods, and/or male partner sterilization).
Exclusion Criteria
2. Subject requires revision surgery prior to Day 75.
3. Subject has undergone manipulation under anesthesia of the index knee or any local injection into the index knee within 30 days prior to the Screening Visit, or within 6 weeks prior to the Screening Visit for long acting lidocaine injection products.
4. Subject has received any investigational drug or device within 30 days prior to the Screening Visit or is enrolled in another clinical trial.
5. Subjects consuming an average of \> 100 mg oral Morphine Sulfate equivalents per day during the run-in phase.
6. Subject has evidence on physical or radiological exam of joint instability or infection involving the index knee.
7. Passive range of motion demonstrates maximal flexion of the index knee \< 90 degrees or maximal extension of the index knee \< -10 degrees.
8. Body Mass Index (BMI) \< 19 kg/m2, or \> 38 kg/m2.
9. Subject has a history of any uncontrolled medical illness that in the investigator's judgment places the subject at unacceptable risk for receipt of Provant therapy.
10. Subject has an ongoing painful condition that in the opinion of the Investigator might have a confounding influence on the safety or effectiveness analysis for this study.
11. Use of systemic corticosteroids within 2 months of the Screening visit.
12. Subject anticipates the need for surgery of any type through the Day 75 visit.
13. Subjects whom, in the judgment of the Investigator, have serious psychosocial co-morbidities.
14. History of drug or alcohol abuse within one year prior to screening.
15. Subject has a history of malignancy within the past five years other than successfully treated non-metastatic basal cell or squamous cell carcinomas of the skin in the treatment area and/or localized carcinoma in situ of the cervix.
16. Subject has an implanted pacemaker, defibrillator, neurostimulator, spinal cord stimulator, bone stimulator, cochlear implant, or other implanted device with an implanted metal lead(s).
17. Existing or planned pregnancy.
18. Subject has been previously treated with study device.
19. Subject is in current litigation related to the index knee or is receiving Worker's Compensation for an injury related to the index knee.
20. Subject is unwilling or unable to follow study instructions, comply with the treatment regimen, study visits, and ePRO assessments.
21. Standard deviation around the mean of the average pain intensity scores during the run-in period is \>2.0.
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Regenesis Biomedical, Inc.
INDUSTRY
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
El Cajon, California, United States
Lone Tree, Colorado, United States
Bradenton, Florida, United States
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, United States
Las Vegas, Nevada, United States
New York, New York, United States
Raleigh, North Carolina, United States
Spartanburg, South Carolina, United States
St. George, Utah, United States
Danville, Virginia, United States
Spokane, Washington, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
RBI.2014.002
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id