Automated Spinal Cord Stimulation Programmer with Patient Feedback

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

The manual programming of spinal cord stimulation systems with increased numbers of electrodes becomes excessively time-consuming due to the exponential increase in electrode and parameter combinations, making it inefficient for healthcare professionals to establish optimal therapeutic programs.

Innovation Solution

A programmer system that includes a clinician programmer, patient-feedback device, and implantable pulse generator, allowing for automated programming and patient feedback to efficiently identify optimal electrode combinations and stimulation parameters for pain relief, reducing the time required for programming and improving treatment efficacy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If manual programming is used with increased number of electrodes, then electrode coverage and treatment options are improved, but programming time and complexity increase exponentially

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveelectrode coverageVSAvoidprogramming time

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements automated feedback mechanisms where the programmer receives real-time feedback from the patient about stimulation comfort and efficacy. This feedback loop allows the system to automatically adjust and identify optimal electrode combinations without requiring manual trial-and-error by the clinician, thus resolving the contradiction between comprehensive electrode coverage and programming time.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The automated programming system performs self-service by automatically selecting electrode combinations and adjusting stimulation parameters based on programmed algorithms and patient feedback. This eliminates the need for manual programming of each electrode individually, allowing the system to handle increased electrode counts without proportionally increasing programming time.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

2Adaptability or versatility

If manual programming is used with increased number of electrodes, then treatment customization is improved, but ease of operation deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvetreatment customizationVSAvoidease of operation

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The system replaces the manual mechanical process of programming each electrode individually with an automated computational system. The programmer uses algorithms and patient feedback to automatically determine optimal electrode combinations, substituting manual operation with automated intelligence while preserving treatment customization capabilities.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The automated programming system acts as an intermediary between the clinician's treatment goals and the complex electrode configuration. It translates high-level treatment objectives into specific electrode combinations and parameters, shielding the operator from the complexity of manual electrode-by-electrode programming while maintaining customization.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

3Productivity

If automated programming is implemented, then programming time is reduced, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveprogramming efficiencyVSAvoidprogrammer complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The automated programmer incorporates feedback mechanisms that receive real-time data from the patient about stimulation comfort and effectiveness. This feedback drives the automated selection process, allowing the system to efficiently identify optimal configurations without requiring overly complex pre-programmed algorithms, thus balancing productivity gains with manageable device complexity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The programmer performs self-service through automated algorithms that independently evaluate electrode combinations and adjust parameters based on patient feedback. This self-service capability reduces programming time while containing complexity within the automated system rather than requiring complex manual procedures.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #25Self-service

Data Source

PatentEP2567730B1Positioning leads on patient model using a graphical user interface

Publication Date: 2018.04.25 NUVECTRA CORP

Figure 1
Figure 2~3
Figure 4

AI summary

A stimulation system, such as a spinal cord stimulation (SCS) system, for storing position information of an implanted medical lead implanted in a patient. A communication unit is configured to receive, from a first programmer, position data that indicates an actual position of the implanted medical lead with respect to a spinal column of the patient and an anatomically correct image of the spinal column. The communication unit is further configured to forward the position data, and to transmit both to a second programmer. The second programmer is then able to display a representation of the implanted medical lead on the anatomically correct image in an anatomically correct location and in an actual orientation based on the position data.