Key result
Rechargeable implantable pulse generators were preferred by 87.3% of Parkinson's disease patients undergoing deep brain stimulation, with choice significantly influenced by affordability, while satisfaction remained high and comparable between rechargeable and non-rechargeable devices (88.0% vs 85.7%).
Why the study?
Patients with Parkinson's disease undergoing deep brain stimulation now have a choice between fixed-life and rechargeable implantable pulse generators, each having advantages and disadvantages.
Does the choice of rechargeable vs non-rechargeable IPG affect patient satisfaction in Parkinson's disease patients treated with DBS?
Cross-Sectional (n=220)
No
Does the choice of rechargeable vs non-rechargeable IPG affect patient satisfaction in Parkinson's disease patients treated with DBS?
Absolute Event Rate: 88% vs 85.7%
p-value: p=>0.05
Most Chinese Parkinson's disease patients treated with DBS prefer rechargeable IPGs and are satisfied with their choice, with economic status being a critical factor in their decision.
May guide affordability-informed device selection in Parkinson's DBS; hypothesis-generating and should not yet change practice.
Introduction: DBS is a widely used therapy for PD. There is now a choice between fixed-life implantable pulse generators (IPGs) and rechargeable IPGs, each having advantages and disadvantages. This study aimed to evaluate the preference and satisfaction of Chinese patients with Parkinson's disease (PD) who were treated with deep brain stimulation (DBS). Materials and Methods: Two hundred and twenty PD patients were treated with DBS and completed a self-reported questionnaire to assess their long-term satisfaction and experience with the type of battery they had chosen and the key factors affecting these choices. The survey was performed online and double-checked for completeness and accuracy. Results: The median value of the postoperative duration was 18 months. The most popular way for patients to learn about DBS surgery was through media (79/220, 35.9%) including the Internet and television programs. In total, 87.3% of the DBS used rechargeable IPGs (r-IPG). The choice between rechargeable and non-rechargeable IPGs was significantly associated with affordability ( χ ( 1 ) 2 = 19.13, p < 0.001). Interestingly, the feature of remote programming significantly affected patients' choices between domestic and imported brands ( χ ( 1 ) 2 = 16.81, p < 0.001). 87.7% of the patients were satisfied with the stimulating effects as well as the implanted device itself. 40.6% of the patients with r-IPGs felt confident handling devices within 1 week after discharge. More than half of the patients checked their batteries every week. The mean interval for battery recharge was 4.3 days. 57.8% of the patients spent around 1 h recharging, and 71.4% of them recharged the battery independently. Conclusions: Most patients were satisfied with their choice of IPGs. The patients' economic status and the remote programming function of the device were the two most critical factors in their decision. The skill of recharging the IPG was easy to master for most patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qiu et al. (2021) conducted a cross-sectional in Parkinson's disease (n=220). Rechargeable implantable pulse generator (r-IPG) vs. Non-rechargeable implantable pulse generator (nr-IPG) was evaluated on Patient satisfaction with the chosen IPG device (p=>0.05). Rechargeable implantable pulse generators were preferred by 87.3% of Parkinson's disease patients undergoing deep brain stimulation, with choice significantly influenced by affordability, while satisfaction remained high and comparable between rechargeable and non-rechargeable devices (88.0% vs 85.7%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: