CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02928055Updated Jun 18, 2021Results posted

Peripheral Nerve Stimulation for Shoulder Pain: Dose Response

An interventional study of Peripheral Nerve Stimulation in Stroke and Shoulder Pain, sponsored by MetroHealth Medical Center. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 21 Years to 89 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2021-06-18.

Sponsored by MetroHealth Medical Center · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
23
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
21 Years to 89 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The primary objective of this RCT is explore the mechanism for Hemiplegic Shoulder Pain (HSP) reduction due to treatment with peripheral nerve stimulation. We will explore the association of subject-specific clinical and demographic information and pain relief from PNS. We will explore the possible role of central sensitization mechanisms in perpetuating pain via measures of sensory and pain perception. Lastly, we will explore the dose-response association of muscle-contraction from PNS and pain reduction, completion of activities of daily living (ADLs), and improvement in quality of life.

Read the detailed description

Hemiplegic shoulder pain (HSP) affects up to 60% of moderate to severely impaired stroke survivors. HSP is associated with poor rehabilitation outcomes, including interference with activities of daily living (ADLs) and poor quality of life (QoL). While many treatments for HSP have been proposed, most do not result in long-term relief of pain.

The investigators developed the use of intramuscular peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) for the treatment of HSP, which involves the temporary placement of a percutaneous intramuscular electrode to stimulate the axillary nerve motor points to the deltoid muscle. The deltoid muscle is stimulated for 6 hours per day for 3 weeks, causing comfortable, non-fatiguing contractions. This treatment, which occurs in the community setting, results in pain relief for up to 12 months when compared to treatment with a hemisling. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) with pain as the primary outcome concluded that intramuscular PNS was the only treatment to provide long-term relief of pain for those with HSP. We have completed two RCTs that have demonstrated that a short-term PNS treatment (i.e., 3 or 6 weeks) provides pain relief. The first trial demonstrated efficacy in long-term pain relief in more than 60% of subjects for greater than 12 months. The second trial corroborated the finding that more than 60% of subjects receiving PNS achieved long-term pain reduction, and also showed that PNS reduces pain more than that achieved with physical therapy. The mechanism of action of PNS in reduction of HSP is not yet known. Thus, the primary objective of this RCT is explore the mechanism for HSP reduction.

The mechanisms behind PNS for the treatment of HSP are not known. First, individual variation may contribute to response to PNS, thus we will explore the association of subject-specific clinical and demographic information and pain relief from PNS. Secondly, our team and others have found that in the chronic stage central sensitization mechanisms may also have a role in perpetuating pain, as it does in other forms of chronic shoulder pain. These mechanisms will be explored via measures of sensory and pain perception. Finally, our approach to delivering PNS for HSP is different from other treatments in which PNS is delivered through skin surface electrodes (e.g., transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation or TENS) in that our treatment produces repeated muscle contraction over the course of weeks. Treatments such as TENS generates tingling sensations (paresthesias) over the painful area, and pain relief following stimulation is short-lived, seldom lasting more than a few hours. We postulate that long-term pain relief for HSP after PNS treatment is due to the repeated muscle contraction that occurs daily over the course of treatment, thus we will explore the dose-response association of muscle-contraction from PNS and pain reduction, completion of activities of daily living (ADLs), and improvement in quality of life.

02

Conditions studied

  • Stroke
  • Shoulder Pain

Keywords

  • Stroke
  • Shoulder Pain
  • Electrical stimulation
  • Neuromuscular stimulation
  • Intramuscular stimulation
03

In context

Shoulder Pain

707 studies on the registry are indexed under Shoulder Pain; 152 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 23 is below the median of 60 across 561 interventional studies indexed under Shoulder Pain.

Browse Shoulder Pain studies →

Lead sponsor

MetroHealth Medical Center is the lead sponsor of 101 studies on the registry; 19 are open to participants now.

Of its 12 completed or terminated interventional studies of FDA-regulated products, 7 (58%) have results posted.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
21 Years to 89 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

  • shoulder pain localized to the glenohumeral joint, subacromial area or deltoid insertion associated with: a) rest; b) passive abduction or external rotation range of motion (ROM); c) active abduction ROM; or, d) manual palpation;
  • shoulder pain onset or worsening after the most recent stroke;
  • weakness of shoulder abductors (≤4/5 on MRC if isolated movement is present);
  • ≥ 21-yrs old; \< 90-yrs old;
  • time of stroke ≥ 3-mo;
  • duration of HSP ≥3-mo;
  • HSP with moderate to severe pain (BPI SF-3 ≥ 4);
  • cognitive and communication ability to fulfill study requirements (cognitive ability based upon a score of ≥24 on the Mini Mental Status Exam (MMSE));
  • availability of reliable adult who can assist with study procedures if necessary;
  • willing and able to report shoulder pain and other conditions and complete study visits throughout the 4 month study period.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • joint or overlying skin infection or history of recurrent skin infections;
  • insensate skin;
  • need to take > 1 opioid and > 1 nonopioid analgesic medication for HSP;
  • regular intake of pain medications for another chronic pain;
  • botox injection or subacromial steroid injections to the shoulder within the past 12 wks;
  • receiving OT or PT for HSP;
  • bleeding disorder or INR > 3.0;
  • sensitivity to skin surface electrodes and/or medical-grade adhesives, gels, tapes;
  • medical instability;
  • pregnancy;
  • uncontrolled seizures (>1/mo for 6-mo);
  • history of cardiac arrhythmia with hemodynamic instability;
  • history of lidocaine allergy;
  • history of Parkinson's disease, SCI, TBI, MS, or ipsilateral UE lower motor neuron lesion;
  • history of complex regional pain syndrome, myofacial pain syndrome, other pain conditions (investigator discretion);
  • cardiac pacemaker or other implanted electronic device;
  • history of valvular heart disease (artificial valves, requiring antibiotics for procedures, etc.);
  • severely impaired communication.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
23 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    PNS (3 hr/day)

    The PNS (3 hr/day) Group will receive peripheral nerve stimulation treatment for three weeks (3 hours daily) with an Intramuscular Electrical Stimulator following a one week electrode stabilization period.

    Device: Peripheral Nerve Stimulation

  • Experimental
    PNS (6 hr/day)

    The PNS (6 hr/day) Group will receive peripheral nerve stimulation treatment for three weeks (6 hours daily) with an Intramuscular Electrical Stimulator following a one week electrode stabilization period.

    Device: Peripheral Nerve Stimulation

  • Experimental
    PNS (9 hr/day)

    The PNS (9 hr/day) Group will receive peripheral nerve stimulation treatment for three weeks (9 hours daily) with an Intramuscular Electrical Stimulator following a one week electrode stabilization period.

    Device: Peripheral Nerve Stimulation

Interventions

  • DevicePeripheral Nerve Stimulation

    The stimulation system includes an external stimulator, percutaneous lead and pad. The stimulator snaps onto the pad. The pad has an embedded power source but also serves as the anode. The 1-channel stimulator outputs a biphasic current waveform with current pulse parameter ranges suitable for PNS. The percutaneous lead is inserted using an introducer (like a hypodermic needle) which is withdrawn and the lead is retained in the muscle by a barb at its tip. After a 1-week stabilization period, stimulation is initiated (daily dose is Group-dependent). Stimulus parameters may be adjusted by the research staff as deemed appropriate. The treatment period is 3 weeks after which the lead will be removed. Total time of electrode implantation is no more than 29 days.

    Also known as: Intramuscular Peripheral Nerve Stimulation, Intramuscular Electrical Nerve Stimulation, Smartpatch System

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)- Short Form (SF) Question 3 (BPI-SF3)

    Brief Pain Inventory(BPI) Short Form 3: The BPI has excellent psychometrics and is recommended for the assessment of pain in clinical trials. The developers of the BPI recommend BPI SF-3, the "pain worst" rating, as the primary response metric. The question asks participants to rate their worst pain in the prior 7-d on a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale, where "0" indicates "No pain" and "10" indicates "Pain as bad as you can imagine." A lower score is better.

    Time frame: End of Treatment (EOT), EOT + 3 mo

Other outcomes

  1. Adverse Events (Related)

    Related adverse events are documented as Safety data.

    Time frame: Electrode Implant, Start of Stimulation, 1 week after start of stimulation, 2 weeks after start of stimulation, end of treatment (EOT), EOT + 1mo, EOT + 2 mo, EOT + 3 mo

07

Results

Posted Jun 18, 2021
Limitations and caveats
The trial did not meet the goal of 10 participants per group. Results should be interpreted with caution.

Participant flow

Participant flow — Overall Study
MilestonePNS (3 hr/Day)PNS (6 hr/Day)PNS (9 hr/Day)
Started887
End of treatment886
1 month follow up776
2 month follow up675
3 month follow up565
Completed565
Not completed322

Outcome measures

PrimaryBrief Pain Inventory (BPI)- Short Form (SF) Question 3 (BPI-SF3)

Brief Pain Inventory(BPI) Short Form 3: The BPI has excellent psychometrics and is recommended for the assessment of pain in clinical trials. The developers of the BPI recommend BPI SF-3, the "pain worst" rating, as the primary response metric. The question asks participants to rate their worst pain in the prior 7-d on a 0 to 10 numeric rating scale, where "0" indicates "No pain" and "10" indicates "Pain as bad as you can imagine." A lower score is better.

Time frame:
End of Treatment (EOT), EOT + 3 mo
Reported as:
Mean · score on a scale
Brief Pain Inventory (BPI)- Short Form (SF) Question 3 (BPI-SF3)
score on a scalePNS (3 hr/Day)PNS (6 hr/Day)PNS (9 hr/Day)
End of Treatment Score5.6 (2 to 9)6 (3 to 10)5.67 (2 to 9)
3 month follow up score6.5 (5 to 8)5.2 (0 to 10)4.4 (3 to 8)
Other pre-specifiedAdverse Events (Related)

Related adverse events are documented as Safety data.

Time frame:
Electrode Implant, Start of Stimulation, 1 week after start of stimulation, 2 weeks after start of stimulation, end of treatment (EOT), EOT + 1mo, EOT + 2 mo, EOT + 3 mo

Results for this outcome have not been posted.

Adverse events

Collected over adverse Event were collected for the time frame subject was enrolled in the study. Eligibility through EOT +3 months, an average of 4 months per participant. Non-serious events are listed at a 0% frequency threshold.

Adverse event summary by group
GroupDeathsSeriousOther
PNS (3 hr/Day)0/8 (0%)3/8 (37.5%)6/8 (75%)
PNS (6 hr/Day)0/8 (0%)2/8 (25%)6/8 (75%)
PNS (9 hr/Day)0/7 (0%)0/7 (0%)7/7 (100%)
Most frequent serious events
Most frequent serious events
EventPNS (3 hr/Day)PNS (6 hr/Day)PNS (9 hr/Day)
other medical condition: CancerNeoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)2/80/80/7
Fall with injuryMusculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders0/81/80/7
Orthopedic surgeryMusculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders0/81/80/7
Anxiety(psychosocial)Psychiatric disorders1/80/80/7
Most frequent other events
Most frequent other events
EventPNS (3 hr/Day)PNS (6 hr/Day)PNS (9 hr/Day)
Skin Irritation at Bandage siteSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders5/82/84/7
Skin Irritation at electrode siteSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders1/82/82/7
Arm fatigue/weakness/painMusculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders0/80/82/7
Accidental dislodgment of LeadSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders2/82/81/7
Fall with injuryMusculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders1/82/81/7
Skin Irritation under Sprint PadSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders1/81/80/7
Retained Lead FragmentSkin and subcutaneous tissue disorders1/81/80/7

Baseline characteristics

Age, Categorical
Age, Categorical(Participants)PNS (3 hr/Day)PNS (6 hr/Day)PNS (9 hr/Day)Total
<=18 years0000
Between 18 and 65 years87419
>=65 years0134
Age, Continuous
Age, Continuous(years)PNS (3 hr/Day)PNS (6 hr/Day)PNS (9 hr/Day)Total
Mean55.75 ± 6.2557.5 ± 8.6462.86 ± 5.6458.52 ± 7.35
Sex: Female, Male
Sex: Female, Male(Participants)PNS (3 hr/Day)PNS (6 hr/Day)PNS (9 hr/Day)Total
Female54312
Male34411
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)(Participants)PNS (3 hr/Day)PNS (6 hr/Day)PNS (9 hr/Day)Total
Hispanic or Latino0011
Not Hispanic or Latino88622
Unknown or Not Reported0000
Race (NIH/OMB)
Race (NIH/OMB)(Participants)PNS (3 hr/Day)PNS (6 hr/Day)PNS (9 hr/Day)Total
American Indian or Alaska Native0000
Asian0000
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander1001
Black or African American44210
White34512
More than one race0000
Unknown or Not Reported0000
Region of Enrollment
Region of Enrollment(participants)PNS (3 hr/Day)PNS (6 hr/Day)PNS (9 hr/Day)Total
United States88723
08

Study locations

1 site
  • MetroHealth Medical Center
    Cleveland, Ohio 44109, United States
09

References and documents

Publications

  • Wilson RD, Gunzler DD, Bennett ME, Chae J. Peripheral nerve stimulation compared with usual care for pain relief of hemiplegic shoulder pain: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2014 Jan;93(1):17-28. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0000000000000011. Erratum In: Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2016 Feb;95(2):e29. PubMed 24355994 ↗
  • Chae J, Ng A, Yu DT, Kirsteins A, Elovic EP, Flanagan SR, Harvey RL, Zorowitz RD, Fang ZP. Intramuscular electrical stimulation for shoulder pain in hemiplegia: does time from stroke onset predict treatment success? Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2007 Nov-Dec;21(6):561-7. doi: 10.1177/1545968306298412. Epub 2007 Mar 16. PubMed 17369520 ↗
  • Chae J, Wilson RD, Bennett ME, Lechman TE, Stager KW. Single-lead percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation for the treatment of hemiplegic shoulder pain: a case series. Pain Pract. 2013 Jan;13(1):59-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2012.00541.x. Epub 2012 Mar 26. PubMed 22448759 ↗
  • Chae J, Yu D, Walker M. Percutaneous, intramuscular neuromuscular electrical stimulation for the treatment of shoulder subluxation and pain in chronic hemiplegia: a case report. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2001 Apr;80(4):296-301. doi: 10.1097/00002060-200104000-00014. PubMed 11277137 ↗
  • Chae J, Yu DT, Walker ME, Kirsteins A, Elovic EP, Flanagan SR, Harvey RL, Zorowitz RD, Frost FS, Grill JH, Fang ZP. Intramuscular electrical stimulation for hemiplegic shoulder pain: a 12-month follow-up of a multiple-center, randomized clinical trial. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Nov;84(11):832-42. doi: 10.1097/01.phm.0000184154.01880.72. PubMed 16244520 ↗
  • Wilson RD, Bennett ME, Lechman TE, Stager KW, Chae J. Single-lead percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation for the treatment of hemiplegic shoulder pain: a case report. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011 May;92(5):837-40. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2010.11.003. PubMed 21530732 ↗
  • Yu DT, Chae J, Walker ME, Fang ZP. Percutaneous intramuscular neuromuscular electric stimulation for the treatment of shoulder subluxation and pain in patients with chronic hemiplegia: a pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001 Jan;82(1):20-5. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.18666. PubMed 11239281 ↗
  • Yu DT, Chae J, Walker ME, Kirsteins A, Elovic EP, Flanagan SR, Harvey RL, Zorowitz RD, Frost FS, Grill JH, Feldstein M, Fang ZP. Intramuscular neuromuscular electric stimulation for poststroke shoulder pain: a multicenter randomized clinical trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004 May;85(5):695-704. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2003.07.015. PubMed 15129391 ↗
  • Yu DT, Chae J, Walker ME, Hart RL, Petroski GF. Comparing stimulation-induced pain during percutaneous (intramuscular) and transcutaneous neuromuscular electric stimulation for treating shoulder subluxation in hemiplegia. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2001 Jun;82(6):756-60. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2001.23310. PubMed 11387579 ↗
  • Koog YH, Jin SS, Yoon K, Min BI. Interventions for hemiplegic shoulder pain: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Disabil Rehabil. 2010;32(4):282-91. doi: 10.3109/09638280903127685. PubMed 20055567 ↗
  • Snels IA, Beckerman H, Lankhorst GJ, Bouter LM. Treatment of hemiplegic shoulder pain in the Netherlands: results of a national survey. Clin Rehabil. 2000 Feb;14(1):20-7. doi: 10.1191/026921500668239146. PubMed 10688341 ↗
  • Soo Hoo J, Paul T, Chae J, Wilson RD. Central hypersensitivity in chronic hemiplegic shoulder pain. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2013 Jan;92(1):1-9; quiz 10-3. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31827df862. PubMed 23255268 ↗
  • Wilson RD, Harris MA, Gunzler DD, Bennett ME, Chae J. Percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation for chronic pain in subacromial impingement syndrome: a case series. Neuromodulation. 2014 Dec;17(8):771-6; discussion 776. doi: 10.1111/ner.12152. Epub 2014 Feb 11. PubMed 24512114 ↗
  • Wilson RD, Harris MA, Bennett ME, Chae J. Single-lead percutaneous peripheral nerve stimulation for the treatment of shoulder pain from subacromial impingement syndrome. PM R. 2012 Aug;4(8):624-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2012.03.002. PubMed 22920317 ↗
  • Paul TM, Soo Hoo J, Chae J, Wilson RD. Central hypersensitivity in patients with subacromial impingement syndrome. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012 Dec;93(12):2206-9. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2012.06.026. Epub 2012 Jul 10. PubMed 22789774 ↗

Study documents

  • Study protocol · Dec 18, 2020

Documents are hosted by the registry — open the source record to download them.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

10

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 18, 2021, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
11

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02928055
Lead sponsor
MetroHealth Medical Center
Collaborators
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD), Case Western Reserve University
Responsible party
Richard Wilson, MD (Assistant Professor, Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, MetroHealth Medical Center) — Principal investigator
First posted
Oct 7, 2016
Start date
Oct 2016
Primary completion
Aug 2019
Completion
Oct 30, 2019
Results posted
Jun 18, 2021
Last update
Jun 18, 2021

Study contacts

Richard D Wilson, MD
principal investigator · MetroHealth Medical Center

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Jun 2021. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion