22nd Annual Pain Medicine Meeting 2023

A Cross-sectional Analysis of Conflicts of Interest in Randomized Clinical Trials Related to Spinal Cord Stimulation

INTRODUCTION

•Spinal Cord Stimulation (SCS) efficacy is supported by overwhelmingly positive results in published literature, including randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

•Notable financial contributions from SCS manufacturers can make interventional pain physicians susceptible to conflict of interest (COI) which raise concerns about introducing bias into study design and results presentation1,2.

•We aim to address a research gap on COI in the context of SCS for chronic back pain by investigating the prevalence of COI among SCS-related RCTs and its association with trial outcomes.

METHODS

•Relevant RCTs published after OpenPayments release (2013) were identified.

•Inclusion criteria: RCTs investigating effect of SCS in patients with chronic back and leg pain.

•The extracted data included disclosed COI and payments from SCS manufacturers for each author. Payments in the Research, Education, Food and Beverages, Travel and Lodging categories were not considered COI.

RESULTS

78% (7/9) industry-funded studies reported favorable outcomes. The remaining 22% (2/9) showed positive effect of SCS on pain intensity regardless of the stimulation mode. Non-industry funded studies without COI reported unfavorable outcome in 100% (2/2) of cases

CONCLUSION

•The majority (75%) of RCTs investigating SCS for chronic pain receive industry funding, potentially introducing significant bias.

•Further industry independent RCTs are needed to verify SCS efficacy in treatment of chronic back and leg pain.

22nd Annual Pain Medicine Meeting 2023

A CROSS-SECTIONAL ANALYSIS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIALS RELATED TO SPINAL CORD STIMULATION

Poster Presenter

Authors

Affiliations

Part of Topic