ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07779733Updated Aug 21, 2026

BurstDR Spinal Cord Stimulation Versus Sham in Established Responders

An interventional study of BurstDR Spinal Cord Stimulation and Sham Spinal Cord Stimulation in Chronic Pain, sponsored by Umeå University. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Sweden. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-08-21.

Sponsored by Umeå University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
28
Allocation
Randomized
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study aims to determine whether ongoing BurstDR spinal cord stimulation (SCS) provides pain relief beyond sham stimulation in patients with chronic pain who are established responders to BurstDR therapy.

Participants already implanted with an SCS system and experiencing stable clinical benefit from BurstDR will undergo both active stimulation and sham stimulation in a randomized, double-blind crossover design. Each participant will therefore serve as their own control.

The primary question is whether pain intensity is lower during active BurstDR stimulation compared with sham stimulation. The study will also evaluate treatment satisfaction, patient-reported changes in sleep, mood, daily activity and social activity, the effectiveness of blinding, and short-term safety and tolerability.

Read the detailed description

BurstDR spinal cord stimulation is a paresthesia-free neuromodulation therapy used for the treatment of chronic pain. Although clinical studies have demonstrated beneficial outcomes with BurstDR therapy, the specific contribution of ongoing stimulation, separate from contextual effects, expectation, natural symptom variation, and other nonspecific influences, remains incompletely defined.

This study uses a randomized, double-blind, two-period crossover design in patients who are already implanted with a spinal cord stimulation system and have an established clinical response to BurstDR therapy. Studying established responders avoids potential confounding associated with implantation, postoperative recovery, and initial programming and optimization, and allows the effect of ongoing stimulation to be evaluated under controlled conditions.

Before the randomized treatment periods, each participant will complete a baseline observation under their established active BurstDR settings, followed by a washout period with stimulation switched off. Participants will then undergo two randomized treatment periods: one with active BurstDR stimulation and one with sham stimulation, separated by a second washout period. The order of the two conditions will be randomly assigned, allowing each participant to serve as their own control and thereby reducing the influence of between-patient variability.

During the active condition, stimulation will be delivered using the participant's established clinically effective BurstDR program. During the sham condition, stimulation output will be switched off while study procedures, participant contacts, and data collection will otherwise remain comparable between conditions.

Because BurstDR stimulation is intended to be paresthesia-free, it provides an opportunity for blinded comparison with sham stimulation. Before the randomized treatment phase, a standardized perceptibility assessment will be performed to confirm that participants cannot reliably perceive whether stimulation is active. Device access and information that could reveal treatment allocation will be restricted, and treatment programming will be performed by designated study personnel who are not involved in outcome assessment or the primary analysis.

The crossover and washout design is intended to minimize residual stimulation effects and provide a controlled assessment of the specific contribution of ongoing BurstDR therapy in patients who have previously demonstrated clinical benefit from this treatment.

02

Conditions studied

  • Chronic Pain

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • Spinal Cord Stimulation
  • Passive Recharge Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation
  • Burst Stimulation
  • Neuromodulation
  • Sham Stimulation
  • Paresthesia-Free Stimulation
  • Established Responders
03

In context

Chronic Pain

3,227 studies on the registry are indexed under Chronic Pain; 729 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 28 is below the median of 60 across 2,388 interventional studies indexed under Chronic Pain.

Browse Chronic Pain studies →

Lead sponsor

Umeå University is the lead sponsor of 272 studies on the registry; 60 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

Participants must meet all of the following:

  1. Be 18 years of age or older.
  2. Have an implanted spinal cord stimulation system that can deliver BurstDR stimulation.
  3. Have had a good and stable response to BurstDR therapy, defined as at least a 50% reduction in pain compared with pain before implantation or before starting BurstDR therapy, maintained for at least 3 months on stable stimulation settings.
  4. Have had no major change in pain medication for at least 4 weeks before entering the study.
  5. Be able to understand the study information and provide written .
  6. Be willing and able to complete the study's electronic diaries and follow the study procedures.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria

Participants cannot take part if any of the following apply:

  1. An active infection, wound problem, or other significant problem at the site of the implanted spinal cord stimulation system.
  2. A known or suspected problem with the implanted stimulation system that could affect treatment delivery or safety.
  3. A serious uncontrolled mental health condition, significant problems with memory or thinking, or another condition that could make it difficult to understand the study, provide , follow the study procedures, or provide reliable study information.
  4. Planned surgery, planned changes to spinal cord stimulation programming outside the study, or an expected change in pain medication during the study period.
  5. Pregnancy or breastfeeding.
  6. Inability to use the electronic diary system when no practical alternative or assistance can be provided.
  7. Any other medical or personal condition that, in the investigator's judgment, would make participation unsafe or inappropriate.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(1)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Crossover assignment
Masking
Quadruple (Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
28 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    equence 1: Active BurstDR → Sham

    Following a 1-day baseline observation under established active BurstDR settings, participants undergo a 4-day washout period with stimulation switched off. They then receive 7 days of active BurstDR spinal cord stimulation using their established clinically effective settings. After a second 4-day washout period with stimulation switched off, participants receive 7 days of sham stimulation, during which stimulation output remains switched off.

    Device: BurstDR Spinal Cord Stimulation · Device: Sham Spinal Cord Stimulation

  • Experimental
    Sequence 2: Sham → Active BurstDR

    Following a 1-day baseline observation under established active BurstDR settings, participants undergo a 4-day washout period with stimulation switched off. They then receive 7 days of sham stimulation, during which stimulation output remains switched off. After a second 4-day washout period with stimulation switched off, participants receive 7 days of active BurstDR spinal cord stimulation using their established clinically effective settings.

    Device: BurstDR Spinal Cord Stimulation · Device: Sham Spinal Cord Stimulation

Interventions

  • DeviceBurstDR Spinal Cord Stimulation

    Active BurstDR spinal cord stimulation is delivered for 7 consecutive days using each participant's established clinically effective stimulation settings. Electrode configuration, pulse pattern, pulse width, frequency structure, and amplitude are maintained according to the participant's established therapeutic program, with any adjustment required to maintain imperceptible stimulation completed before the randomized treatment periods.

    Also known as: Passive Recharge Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation

  • DeviceSham Spinal Cord Stimulation

    During sham stimulation, the implanted spinal cord stimulation system remains in place but stimulation output is switched off for 7 consecutive days. The participant-facing programmer is locked and visible device information that could reveal treatment allocation is masked. Study contacts, diary assessments, and follow-up procedures are otherwise equivalent to those during active stimulation.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Within-Participant Difference in Period-Level Median Numeric Rating Scale Pain Intensity Between Active BurstDR and Sham

    Pain intensity is recorded twice daily, morning and evening, using an 11-point Numeric Rating Scale (NRS; 0=no pain to 10=worst pain) for each predefined pain area during each randomized treatment period. All available NRS ratings within each participant and treatment period are pooled, and the period-level median is calculated. The primary outcome is the within-participant paired difference between sham and active BurstDR stimulation (Sham minus Active), with positive values favoring active BurstDR. Baseline-day NRS data are not included in the primary endpoint.

    Time frame: During each 7-day randomized treatment period (Days 5-11 and Days 16-22 after baseline)

Secondary outcomes

  1. Within-Participant Difference in End-of-Period Treatment Satisfaction Score Between Active BurstDR and Sham

    Overall treatment satisfaction is assessed on a 0-10 scale at the end of each 7-day randomized treatment period. Scores obtained following active BurstDR and sham stimulation are compared within each participant.

    Time frame: At the end of each 7-day randomized treatment period (Day 11 and Day 22 after baseline)

  2. Within-Participant Difference in Period-Level Median Patient Global Impression of Change Score for Sleep Quality

    Patient Global Impression of Change for sleep quality is assessed once daily using a 5-point scale during each randomized treatment period. For each participant and treatment period, the median of all available daily sleep ratings is calculated and compared between active BurstDR and sham stimulation.

    Time frame: Daily during each 7-day randomized treatment period (Days 5-11 and Days 16-22 after baseline)

  3. Within-Participant Difference in Period-Level Median Patient Global Impression of Change Score for Mood

    Patient Global Impression of Change for mood is assessed once daily using a 5-point scale during each randomized treatment period. For each participant and treatment period, the median of all available daily mood ratings is calculated and compared between active BurstDR and sham stimulation.

    Time frame: Daily during each 7-day randomized treatment period (Days 5-11 and Days 16-22 after baseline)

  4. Within-Participant Difference in Period-Level Median Patient Global Impression of Change Score for Daily Activity

    Patient Global Impression of Change for daily activity is assessed once daily using a 5-point scale during each randomized treatment period. For each participant and treatment period, the median of all available daily ratings is calculated and compared between active BurstDR and sham stimulation.

    Time frame: Daily during each 7-day randomized treatment period (Days 5-11 and Days 16-22 after baseline)

  5. Within-Participant Difference in Period-Level Median Patient Global Impression of Change Score for Social Activity

    Patient Global Impression of Change for social activity is assessed once daily using a 5-point scale during each randomized treatment period. For each participant and treatment period, the median of all available daily ratings is calculated and compared between active BurstDR and sham stimulation.

    Time frame: Daily during each 7-day randomized treatment period (Days 5-11 and Days 16-22 after baseline)

  6. Perceptibility of Active BurstDR Stimulation Before Randomized Treatment

    A standardized perceptibility assessment using brief randomized stimulation ON/OFF intervals is performed before the first randomized treatment period to verify that the participant cannot reliably perceive active BurstDR stimulation.

    Time frame: At the baseline/programming visit, before the 1-day baseline diary and before Washout 1

  7. Number of Participants With Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events, and Stimulation-Related Complaints

    Adverse events, serious adverse events, and stimulation- or device-related complaints are recorded during study participation. Events will be summarized descriptively and, where feasible, according to whether they occurred during active BurstDR stimulation, sham stimulation, or washout.

    Time frame: From baseline through Day 22 after baseline (completion of the second randomized treatment period)

  8. Participant-Reported Perception of Stimulation During Each Randomized Treatment Period

    At the end of each randomized treatment period, participants are asked whether they felt stimulation or paresthesia at any time during that treatment period. Responses are summarized by treatment condition to assess the integrity of masking.

    Time frame: At the end of each 7-day randomized treatment period (Day 11 and Day 22 after baseline)

07

Study locations

1 site
  • University Hospital of Northern Sweden
    Umeå, 90185, Sweden
08

References and documents

Publications

  • De Ridder D, Plazier M, Kamerling N, Menovsky T, Vanneste S. Burst spinal cord stimulation for limb and back pain. World Neurosurg. 2013 Nov;80(5):642-649.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2013.01.040. Epub 2013 Jan 12. PubMed 23321375 ↗
  • Deer TR, Falowski SM, Moore GA, Hutcheson JK, Pena I, Candido K, Cornidez EG, Fraunberg VUZ, Blomme B, Capobianco RA. Passive Recharge Burst Spinal Cord Stimulation Provides Sustainable Improvements in Pain and Psychosocial Function: 2-year Results From the TRIUMPH Study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2022 Apr 1;47(7):548-556. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004283. PubMed 34812195 ↗
  • Deer T, Slavin KV, Amirdelfan K, North RB, Burton AW, Yearwood TL, Tavel E, Staats P, Falowski S, Pope J, Justiz R, Fabi AY, Taghva A, Paicius R, Houden T, Wilson D. Success Using Neuromodulation With BURST (SUNBURST) Study: Results From a Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial Using a Novel Burst Waveform. Neuromodulation. 2018 Jan;21(1):56-66. doi: 10.1111/ner.12698. Epub 2017 Sep 29. PubMed 28961366 ↗
  • Schu S, Slotty PJ, Bara G, von Knop M, Edgar D, Vesper J. A prospective, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to examine the effectiveness of burst spinal cord stimulation patterns for the treatment of failed back surgery syndrome. Neuromodulation. 2014 Jul;17(5):443-50. doi: 10.1111/ner.12197. Epub 2014 Jun 19. PubMed 24945621 ↗
  • Tabatabaei P, Wanman J, Awad A, Eriksson M, Salomonsson J, Bredemo L, Sjoberg R, Hariz MI, Blomstedt P. Subperception dorsal root ganglion stimulation versus sham stimulation in established responders: a randomized, double-blind crossover clinical trial. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2026 May 13:rapm-2026-107906. doi: 10.1136/rapm-2026-107906. Online ahead of print. PubMed 42128597 ↗

Study documents

PDFs hosted by the registry, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — De-identified individual participant data underlying the primary and secondary results of the study will be available to qualified researchers upon reasonable request following publication of the main study results, subject to applicable data protection legislation, institutional governance, participant confidentiality requirements, and approval of the proposed research purpose.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Analytic code

Time frame: Beginning after publication of the main study results. Data will remain available for a period consistent with institutional data-retention policies and applicable legal requirements.

Access criteria: Access may be granted to qualified researchers with a scientifically sound proposal and an appropriate research purpose. Requests will be reviewed by the principal investigator and/or the responsible institution. Data will be shared only in de-identified form and subject to applicable data protection requirements, institutional approval, and, where required, a data-sharing agreement.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Aug 21, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07779733
Lead sponsor
Umeå University
Responsible party
Pedram Tabatabaei Shafiei (MD, PhD, Umeå University) — Principal investigator
First posted
Aug 21, 2026
Start date
Sep 30, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Dec 31, 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 31, 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Aug 21, 2026

Study contacts

Pedram Tabatabaei, MD, PhD
Contact
pedram.tabatabaei@umu.se
+46-70-7603239
Pedram Tabatabaei, MD, PhD
principal investigator · Umeå University

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Aug 2026. 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