North American Neuromodulation Society Educational Curriculum for Intrathecal Drug Delivery Systems Implantation and Management

A sudden shift for Pain Medicine fellowships - A recount of the 2024 match

Pain Medicine, a field that was once considered primarily a specialty of opioid medication management, evolved into a multimodal care model with the goal of limiting reliance on pain medications. Now, we see another revolution-the advancement from percutaneous procedures to minimally invasive surgical procedures. Despite these changes, Pain Medicine fellowships have consistently been recognized as a competitive subspecialty with more applicants than the number of available positions - until now. The most recent pain fellowship match suggests an abrupt change to the popularity of the specialty (with over 61 unmatched positions and over 35 unfilled programs) for applicants expected to matriculate in the year 2024 [1]. Unfilled positions have risen from 5% to 15% in the past three years. Similarly, unfilled programs have risen from 10% to 30% in the past three years. Several reasons for this sudden change in popularity have been proposed, including a lucrative general anesthesiology market, increasing difficulties with insurance coverage and reimbursement for procedures, and a dearth of advanced pain procedures performed at academic medicine programs. The field is at a critical juncture, necessitating ongoing discussions and collaboration among stakeholders to ensure that trainees are attracted to this dynamic field and are ultimately equipped to meet the evolving needs of patients.

Education and Experience in Intrathecal Drug Delivery Systems (IDDS) During Pain Medicine Fellowships

Objective

Targeted drug delivery (TDD) via intrathecal drug delivery systems (IDDS) exposure and clinical adoption remains low despite multiple well-designed trials that demonstrate safety, efficacy, reliability, and cost-saving benefits. This study aims to understand the possible contributing factors starting with Pain Medicine fellowship training.

Materials and Methods

An internet-based, anonymous pilot survey was distributed to pain medicine fellows enrolled in an Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) accredited pain medicine training program during the 2021-2022 academic year. Fellowship programs were identified using published online ACGME accreditation data. The survey was distributed via email to fellowship program directors and coordinators and was made available through pain medicine societies.

Results

Seventy-one of four hundred and twenty-three pain medicine fellows (17% response rate) completed the survey. Nine percent of respondents evidence-informed opinion coincided with the most recent Polyanalgesic Consensus Conference (PACC) guidelines recommendations for IDDS treatment indications. Fifty-one percent of respondents felt there was an unmet need for IDDS training. About one-third of respondents felt that lack of curriculum, faculty, and cases were barriers to IDDS use, respectively. Thirty-one percent of fellows reported sufficient training for IDDS in their fellowship programs. The majority (70%) of respondents somewhat or strongly support direct training by IDDS manufacturers.

Conclusion

A wide variability exists surrounding IDDS training during ACGME accredited pain medicine fellowship. Insufficient case exposure and lack of a standardized curriculum may play a role in future therapy adoption. The results from this study call for a more standardized training approach with an emphasis on adequate clinical exposure, utilization of peer reviewed educational curriculum and supplemental material to aid pain medicine fellows' education.

Pain Education and Knowledge (PEAK) Consensus Guidelines for Neuromodulation: A Proposal for Standardization in Fellowship and Training Programs

The need to be competent in neuromodulation is and should be a prerequisite prior to completing a fellowship in interventional pain medicine. Unfortunately, many programs lack acceptable candidates for these advanced therapies, and fellows may not receive adequate exposure to neuromodulation procedures. The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) desires to create a consensus of experts to set a minimum standard of competence for neurostimulation procedures, including spinal cord stimulation (SCS), dorsal root ganglion stimulation (DRG-S), and peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS). The executive board of ASPN accepted nominations for colleagues with excellence in the subject matter of neuromodulation and physician education. This diverse group used peer-reviewed literature and, based on grading of evidence and expert opinion, developed critical consensus guides for training that all accredited fellowship programs should adopt. For each consensus point, transparency and recusal were used to eliminate bias, and an author was nominated for evidence grading oversight and bias control. Pain Education and Knowledge (PEAK) Consensus Guidelines for Neuromodulation sets a standard for neuromodulation training in pain fellowship training programs. The consensus panel has determined several recommendations to improve care in the United States for patients undergoing neuromodulation. As neuromodulation training in the United States has evolved dramatically, these therapies have become ubiquitous in pain medicine. Unfortunately, fellowship programs and the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) pain program requirements have not progressed training to match the demands of modern advancements. PEAK sets a new standard for fellowship training and presents thirteen practice areas vital for physician competence in neuromodulation.