Opioid‐sparing effects of 10 kHz spinal cord stimulation: a review of clinical evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic pain is a common condition that affects the physical, emotional, and mental well-being of patients and can significantly diminish their quality of life. Due to growing concerns about the substantial risks of long-term opioid use, both governmental agencies and professional societies have recommended prioritizing the use of nonpharmacologic treatments, when suitable, in order to reduce or eliminate the need for opioid use. The use of 10 kHz spinal cord stimulation (10 kHz SCS) is one such nonpharmacologic alternative for the treatment of chronic, intractable pain of the trunk and limbs. This review examines published clinical data regarding the efficacy of 10 kHz SCS for decreasing chronic pain in patients and its potential to reduce or eliminate opioid usage. Multiple prospective and retrospective studies in patients with intractable pain demonstrated that 10 kHz SCS treatment provided ≥50% pain relief in >70% patients after at least 1 year of treatment. Pain relief with 10 kHz SCS therapy ranged from 54% to 87% in the studies. More importantly, the mean daily dose of opioids required by patients in these studies was reduced after 10 kHz SCS treatment, and on average over 60% patients in studies either reduced or eliminated opioids at the last follow-up.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".