INTRODUCTION: The SARS-CoV Disease (COVID-19) pandemic has upended health care systems and one of the casualties has been the trainee recruitment process since social distancing and travel restrictions make an in-person experience improbable. At the University of California, Davis (UCD), our Pain Division transitioned our internally validated multiple mini-interview (MMI) process to a virtual environment METHODS: Applicants signed a confidentiality agreement prior to their interviews and were invited to watch a series of videos orienting them to the process and to the program itself. All faculty raters interviewed candidates using a total of 6 non-medical MMI scenarios with corresponding questions and scoring rubrics through the Zoom platform. Applicants were then welcomed to voluntary informal conversations with the current fellow trainees and faculty. An optional survey was sent to the applicants post-interview to assess their overall satisfaction with the virtual process. RESULTS: The survey analyzed the following using a 5 point Likert scale: Overall Satisfaction, Video Overview Program, Interview Day Details, Video Tour, Web-Based Interviews, Process was Fair, and finally a question on Informed Decision regarding receiving sufficient information to formulate their rank list. All respondents (80% response rate) reported being either satisfied or very satisfied with each of the aspects of the interview process detailed above. CONCLUSIONS: While technical difficulties and confidentiality issues are of concern when offering an entirely web based recruitment, our group was able to transition traditional in-person MMI to a virtual platform using a similar structure which was well-received by applicants

Assess the efficacy of ultrasound, a more accessible point of care modality, to describe the dimensions of the epidural space. Determine the reliability of ultrasound for measuring cervical and lumbar epiduralspaces for ESIs in chronic pain patients and compares these to MRI measurement.

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.

Conventionally, peripheral nerve stimulation (PNS) for treatment of chronic pain has involved a two-stage process: a short-term (e.g., 7 days) trial and, if significant pain relief is achieved, a permanent PNS system is implanted. A percutaneous PNS treatment is now available where a coiled lead may be implanted for up to 60 days with the goal of producing sustained relief. In the present review, published prospective trials using percutaneous PNS treatment were identified and synthesized. The collected evidence indicates that percutaneous PNS treatment for up to 60 days provides durable clinically significant improvements in pain and pain interference. Similar efficacy across diverse targets and etiologies supports the broad applicability for use within the chronic pain population using this nonopioid technology.

Introduction

Applicants to chronic pain medicine fellowship programs often express confusion regarding the importance of various selection criteria. This study sought to elucidate program directors' considerations in applicant selection for fellowship interviews and ranking and to correlate these criteria with match statistics to provide a guide for prospective candidates.

Methods

An electronic survey was sent to all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited chronic pain fellowship directors. The importance of various applicant characteristics were evaluated and compared with recent match data.

Results

Fifty-seven program directors completed the survey. The most important factors involved in applicant interview selection were perceived commitment to the specialty, letters of recommendation from pain faculty, scholarly activities, and leadership experiences. Although completion of a pain rotation was valued highly, experience with procedures was of relatively low importance. There was no preference if rotations were completed within the responders' department. Variability was noted when considering internal applicants or the applicant's geographic location. When citing main factors in ranking applicants, interpersonal skills, interview impression and applicant's fit within the institution were highly ranked by most responders.

Discussion

Assessment of an applicant's commitment to chronic pain is challenging. Most responders prioritize the applicant's commitment to chronic pain as a specialty, scholarly activity, participation in chronic pain rotations, pain-related conferences and letters of recommendation from pain faculty. Chronic pain medicine fellowship candidates should establish a progressive pattern of genuine interest and involvement within the specialty during residency training to optimize their fellowship match potential.

Radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN), also known as radiofrequency ablation (RFA), is a common interventional procedure used to treat pain from an innervated structure. RFN has historically been used to treat chronic facet-joint mediated pain. The use of RFN has more recently expanded beyond facet-joint mediated pain to peripherally innervated targets. In addition, there has also been the emergence of different radiofrequency modalities, including pulsed and cooled RFN. The use of RFN has been particularly important where conservative and/or surgical measures have failed to provide pain relief. With the emergence of this therapeutic option and its novel applications, the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified the need for formal evidence-based guidance. The authors formed a multidisciplinary work group tasked to examine the latest evidence-based medicine for the various applications of RFN, including cervical, thoracic, lumbar spine; posterior sacroiliac joint pain; hip and knee joints; and occipital neuralgia. Best practice guidelines, evidence and consensus grading were provided for each anatomical target.

The objective of this peripheral nerve stimulation consensus guideline is to add to the current family of consensus practice guidelines and incorporate a systematic review process. The published literature was searched from relevant electronic databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science from database inception to March 29, 2021. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies that described peripheral nerve stimulation in patients in terms of clinical outcomes for various pain conditions, physiological mechanism of action, surgical technique, technique of placement, and adverse events. Twenty randomized controlled trials and 33 prospective observational studies were included in the systematic review process. There is Level I evidence supporting the efficacy of PNS for treatment of chronic migraine headaches via occipital nerve stimulation; chronic hemiplegic shoulder pain via stimulation of nerves innervating the trapezius, supraspinatus, and deltoid muscles; failed back surgery syndrome via subcutaneous peripheral field stimulation; and lower extremity neuropathic and lower extremity post-amputation pain. Evidence from current Level I studies combined with newer technologies facilitating less invasive and easier electrode placement make peripheral nerve stimulation an attractive alternative for managing patients with complex pain disorders. Peripheral nerve stimulation should be used judiciously as an adjunct for chronic and acute postoperative pain following adequate patient screening and positive diagnostic nerve block or stimulation trial.

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.

INTRODUCTION: Painful diabetic neuropathy (PDN) is a leading cause of pain and disability globally with a lack of consensus on the appropriate treatment of those suffering from this condition. Recent advancements in both pharmacotherapy and interventional approaches have broadened the treatment options for PDN. There exists a need for a comprehensive guideline for the safe and effective treatment of patients suffering from PDN. OBJECTIVE: The SWEET Guideline was developed to provide clinicians with the most comprehensive guideline for the safe and appropriate treatment of patients suffering from PDN. METHODS: The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified an educational need for a comprehensive clinical guideline to provide evidence-based recommendations for PDN. A multidisciplinary group of international experts developed the SWEET guideline. The world literature in English was searched using Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, BioMed Central, Web of Science, Google Scholar, PubMed, Current Contents Connect, Meeting Abstracts, and Scopus to identify and compile the evidence for diabetic neuropathy pain treatments (per section as listed in the manuscript) for the treatment of pain. Manuscripts from 2000-present were included in the search process. RESULTS: After a comprehensive review and analysis of the available evidence, the ASPN SWEET guideline was able to rate the literature and provide therapy grades for most available treatments for PDN utilizing the United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria. CONCLUSION: The ASPN SWEET Guideline represents the most comprehensive review of the available treatments for PDN and their appropriate and safe utilization.