War Wounded, a Comparison of Two Pain Management Approaches
WithdrawnNot applicableNCT01620411
View the official record on ClinicalTrials.gov Recruiting status changes often. Contact the study team listed on ClinicalTrials.gov, and talk to your doctor before joining a study.
This study has no listed site in Canada in this snapshot. It is included as part of the worldwide chronic pain corpus.
Brief summary (from the registry)
This study aims to investigate the relative effectiveness of two different pain management plans for injuries sustained while active duty in the military. One arm of the study has subjects undergo standard comprehensive medical management, while the other adds the placement of a spinal cord stimulator, a common procedure for the alleviation of pain.
Study details
- Official title
- Management of Chronic Pain in Military Patients With Injuries Sustained During Active Duty. Comparison of Spinal Cord Stimulation and Comprehensive Medical Management.
- Conditions
- Injuries
- Pain
- Interventions
- Other: Comprehensive Medical Management
- Procedure: Spinal Cord Stimulator
- Sponsor
- University of California, San Diego
- Start date
- 2012-06
- Primary completion
- 2016-06
- Sex
- Male
- Age range
- from 18 Years
- Results posted
- No results posted in this snapshot
- Countries
- United States
- Total sites listed
- 1
Eligibility criteria
Show eligibility criteria (verbatim from the registry)
Inclusion Criteria: 1. Subject is a veteran or active duty service member injured while on active military duty receiving care for pain related to the injury(ies) in the Department of Defense health care system or through the Department of Veteran's Affairs. 2. Subject is 18 years of age or older. 3. The elapsed time since the active-duty injury leading to chronic pain is not less than 3 months. 4. Subject reports constant or daily episodes of injury-related pain of at least moderate severity, graded 4 or higher on an 11-point NPRS (point estimate by subject and Investigator at time of enrolment based on overall pain or pain at a specific site). Pain may be nociceptive, neuropathic, or mixed. Phantom pain associated with amputation of an extremity or extremities is allowed. 5. Attempts to control pain with commercially available systemic analgesics have not provided adequate relief, in the judgment of the managing physician and subject. 6. Subject is able to localize site(s) of pain. At least one site of daily pain contributing to moderate severity (Inclusion Criterion 4) and intractability (Inclusion Criterion 5) must be in an extremity, or phantom pain at the site of an amputated extremity. If the extremity site of pain is not an amputated limb, then the pain must have a neuropathic component. This site is identified as the site of Target Pain (TP) for efficacy evaluations during the trial. 7. Subject is an acceptable candidate for surgical placement of an indwelling spinal cord stimulation device. 8. Subject is judged an appropriate candidate for treatment using the available techniques and interventions encompassed within the protocol's definition of comprehensive medical management. 9. For the duration of the trial, subject is willing to limit interventions for control of chronic pain to those approved by the Investigator. 10. The subject is judged psychologically appropriate for either treatment intervention, based on the impression of an interviewing psychologist or psychiatrist. 11. Subject provides informed consent. Exclusion Criteria: 1. Subject experiences phantom pain associated with amputation of both an upper and lower extremity. 2. Subject has headache or visceral truncal pain or other non-musculoskeletal pain as the only pain that results in constant or daily scores of ≥4 on the 11-point NPRS. 3. Subject has spinal disease that would, in the judgment of the investigator, preclude placement of a spinal cord stimulator. 4. Subject has ongoing…
Source: ClinicalTrials.gov (US National Library of Medicine), snapshot October 2026. Check the registry for current recruiting status. Record: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT01620411