It was reported that the patient experienced a loss of therapeutic effect.It was noted that the device had been working wonderfully prior to the change in therapy.It was noted that the patient's pain returned 4-5 days prior to report.It was noted that the pain was the same kind as what he had before he got the stimulator.It was noted that the pain was not as intense as it had been before the stimulator, however, the patient was concerned that it was coming back.It was noted that "yesterday" the patient took 4 vicodins because he "felt horrible," even though he hadn't used pain medications "for awhile." it was noted that the patient still felt stimulation and that there were no changes in how he felt it.The patient was noted to have had 5 programs with e being the best for him.The other programs were tried without any better results.Fifteen days later, it was reported that the patient had an appointment with his doctor or manufacturer's representative on (b)(6) 2014.It was further reported on 2015 (b)(6) by the patient's physician that the cause of the event was a lead fracture and" impedance." reprogramming had been done on 2014 (b)(6).There was no documentation if these changes were effective.However, on 2014 (b)(6), possible lead fractures were noted.At that time, they were unable to gain leg coverage.Impedances on electrodes 13, 14 and 15 were noted (impedance reading not given).On 2014 (b)(6), the patient underwent lead replacement as well as revision of the right upper buttock pocket site.The outcome was not provided but was requested.If the outcome is obtained, a follow up report will be sent.
|