Cycling Versus Continuous Mode in Neuromodulator Programming
NCT ID: NCT02551822
Last Updated: 2018-04-27
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
32 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2012-07-31
2015-11-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Neuromodulation Implantation Settings Variation for Overactive Bladder
NCT02112786
Cyclic Versus Continuous Sacral Neuromodulation for LUTS
NCT06170450
Effects of Bladder Training and Pelvic Floor Muscle Training on the Symptomatology of Overactive Bladder Syndrome
NCT03331081
Sacral Neuromodulation & Urodynamics
NCT03614767
Direct Full-stage Implantation of Sacral Neuromodulation
NCT03697954
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
The purpose of this research proposal is to evaluate the effect of cycling versus continuous neuromodulator programming on overactive bladder syndrome. s.In 1997, the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) approved the sacral nerve stimulator as a treatment for refractory urge incontinence. Sacral Neuromodulation works via stimulation of the sacral nerve roots 2-4, (S-2, S-3 and S-4), although the exact mechanism of action is unknown. While implanted electronic stimulators have been used increasingly in the last twenty years, little investigation has documented the actual programming of the stimulator. Prospective trials examining the ideal programming parameters for a specific condition are needed to better identify optimal use of sacral nerve modulation therapy.
In brief, women with overactive bladder who are refractory to treatment are eligible for a trial placement of a neuromodulator. The modulators are placed in two stages; in stage one, a temporary lead is placed in the 3rd sacral foramen. Each neuromodulator has 4 electrodes that are placed via a single lead into the 3rd sacral foramen. The patient will generally return to clinic one week following stage 1 for a post-op evaluation. If the patient reports a 50% improvement in frequency as measured on a 3-day voiding diary, the modulator is permanently implanted. This is stage 2. After placement, the modulator is programmed in the recovery room. Patients are trialed on four set programs for their stimulator. Each program differs in electrode combination, pulse width, amplitude and rate as well as direction of current. Each of the four programs is tested with the patient to determine which is felt by the patient in the perineum and is comfortable. Finally, patients can either have their modulator set on a cycling or continuous mode. Currently, decisions regarding programming are made by whoever is assessing the patient and are not data driven.
Typically, cycling means the neuromodulator stimulation is on for 16 seconds \& off for 8 seconds. Continuous means the patient receives constant stimulation. A single retrospective study described program parameters for programming of the modulator for treatment of Over Active Bladder (OAB). It described 67 patients who had good response to neuromodulation, and determined the mean pulse width was 204 microseconds, the pulse width ranged between 120-270 microseconds; the average rate was 9 with a range of 2-20 pulses/second. The majority of women were on cycling mode. Program cycling is purported to decrease the incidence of patients reporting that their modulator is no longer working and thought to extend battery life. No other study has investigated whether or not cycling of the stimulator improves patient outcomes.
Our objective is to compare patient outcomes using in validated symptom measures of OAB between women who are set on cycling versus continuous programs. Investigators propose to perform a randomized crossover study in women who are successfully treated with neuromodulation to either continuous or cycling mode and compare differences between groups on the OAB-q SF symptom questionnaire. The investigators will also compare differences in urinary frequency and pad counts between women randomized to cycling versus continuous stimulation using voiding diaries.
Specific Aims and Objectives:
Aim #1: To compare OAB improvement as measured by the Overactive Bladder Questionnaire Short Form Symptom questionnaire (OAB-q SF symptom questionnaire) between women with continuous versus cycling stimulation of their neuromodulator.
Hypothesis #1: Investigators hypothesize that women on cycling programs will report higher OAB-q SF symptom scores than women on continuous programs.
Aim #2: To compare urinary frequency as recorded on 3 day voiding diaries between women placed on continuous versus cycling stimulation of their neuromodulator.
Hypothesis #2: Investigators hypothesize that women on cycling programs report less urinary frequency as measured on 3 day voiding diaries than women on continuous programming.
Aim #3: To compare pad usage between women on cycling programs versus those on continuous programs.
Hypothesis #3: Investigators hypothesize that women on cycling programs will report less pad use than women on cycling programs.
Methods:The investigators will conduct a double-blinded crossover randomized controlled clinical trial. Up to 50 women will need to be recruited in order to randomize twenty-three women who are successful with the Stage 1 implant of their neuromodulator. After written consent, clinical data will be collected and questionnaires administered. After successful Stage 1 placement women will complete a 3-day voiding diary. The recording of symptoms and completion of a voiding diary are standard of care for women undergoing neuromodulation treatment. These data will be collected and recorded.
Randomization will occur after successful Stage 2 implantation. Study personnel not otherwise involved in patient care will assign it. Randomization assignment will be by random number table in permutated blocks of four, to ensure that equal numbers of women will be assigned to each group. Assignments will be kept in sealed opaque envelopes and will be opened in sequential order once women have undergone successful Stage 2 implantation. Study personnel programming the modulator after implantation will either program the modulator to continuous or cycling programs. Patients will be blinded to randomization assignment.
Prior to their 3 month visit, study subjects will complete another voiding diary. At the visit, women will complete the OAB-q SF symptom questionnaire as well as the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). At this visit, women who were assigned to continuous stimulation will be switched to cycling stimulation and women who were assigned to cycling stimulation will be switched to continuous stimulation. Women again will report for clinical follow-up at six months. Women will be asked to complete their voiding diary. At this clinic visit women will once again complete the OAB-q SF symptoms questionnaire and PGI-I
Investigators obtain a written consent from qualifying patient. Patients will then be randomized to Cycling or Continuous mode at Stage II implantation.
Statistics:
Analysis: Descriptive statistics will be used to describe patient characteristics. The analysis of the change in OAB-q SF scores in this 2 group, 2 period (2x2) crossover design will be a repeated measures (RM) Analyses of Variance (ANOVA) with both the treatment group (cycling versus continuous) and period (first treatment versus second treatment) as repeated factors. The possibility of a cross over effect will be accounted for in the analysis by an order effect covariate (equal to 1 if cycling is first and 0 if not.) Analysis of urinary incontinence episodes and pad counts as recorded on 3 day voiding diaries will be analyzed by repeated measures Poisson regression. (Using SAS's PROC GEN MOD with a Poisson distribution) Significance is set at p = 0.05.
Power analysis: In our cross over randomized controlled trial the investigators assume that a clinically important difference between changes in OAB-q SF scores between women on continuous versus cycling stimulation, with a standard deviation of the paired differences of 15 points between groups with an alpha error of 0.05 and power of 80%, 20 women are needed to be randomized into equal groups.
(Hintze, J (2011) PASS11. NCSS, LLC\< Kaysville Utah, US. www.ncss.com)(9), Assuming that 15% of women will be lost to follow-up the investigators will need to randomize 23 women to the study.
2\. Expected outcome: This randomized control trial will demonstrate that women on the cycling program mode will report higher OAB-q SF Symptom scores, and will report less urinary frequency and less pad usage as measured on 3-day voiding diaries.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
CROSSOVER
TREATMENT
SINGLE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Cycling
Sacral neuromodulator devices (implanted pulse generator) will be programmed to on-off cycles (on 16 seconds, off 8 seconds). This means the devices are not continuously on. Rather they are on a "cycling" program.
sacral neuromodulator
The Implanted Pulse Generator will be set via randomization to continuous vs cycling stimulation.
Continuous
Sacral neuromodulator devices (implanted pulse generator) will be programmed to be on continuously. This means the devices are continuously on. They are on a "continuous" program.
sacral neuromodulator
The Implanted Pulse Generator will be set via randomization to continuous vs cycling stimulation.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
sacral neuromodulator
The Implanted Pulse Generator will be set via randomization to continuous vs cycling stimulation.
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
* Women with successful Stage #1 implantation for treatment of refractory OAB
* Subjects may be enrolled in other studies as long as there are no changes to the neuromodulation device. Women may continue other OAB therapies that they are on, but as asked to not start new therapies.
* Not currently pregnant and with no plans to become pregnant during the course of the trial.
* Willing as well as mentally and physically capable of completing all study related procedures and materials
Exclusion Criteria
* Incarcerated women
* Non-English speakers
* Pregnant women
* Scheduled or planned MRIs or diathermy
21 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Society of Urologic Nurses and Associates
UNKNOWN
University of New Mexico
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Yuko Komesu
MD, Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Yuko M Komesu, MD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center
Gwendolyn Beer, RN
Role: STUDY_CHAIR
University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center
Rebecca G Rogers, MD
Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR
University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University of New Mexico Hospital
Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
University of New Mexico Health Science Center
Albuquerque, New Mexico, 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.
12-133
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.