Draft — pending COA review. Rette derived these criteria from the ACOEM guidelines adopted into the MTUS. They are not COA documents and have not been signed off by a COA physician reviewer.

MTUS Treatment ChecklistbyRette

Utilization Review Checklist

Implantable Spinal Cord Stimulator for Low Back or Radicular Pain

Derived from the ACOEM Low Back Disorders Guideline, edition 13 February 2020, as adopted into the California MTUS 23 November 2021. CPT 63650, 63655, 63685, 63688. ICD-10 M54.16, M54.17, M96.1, G89.4.

Draft — not reviewed or approved by COA. Prepared by Rette from the ACOEM guideline named above. This is not a COA document and does not reproduce COA’s own checklists.

Patient name: Claim #:

Procedures — the guideline treats each separately

Implantable spinal cord stimulator for low back pain, radicular pain syndrome or failed back surgery syndrome

Not Recommended.

Strength of Evidence — Not Recommended, Insufficient Evidence (I) · confidence low

Presumptive Diagnosis

Required

  • Clear diagnosis of chronic radiculopathy with supportive evidence on electrodiagnostic study, and leg pain predominating over axial back pain

    Clear diagnosis of chronic radiculopathy including supportive evidence on electrodiagnostic study. Leg pain should predominate over axial back pain — p. 181

Conservative Care

All of the following

  • Poor or inadequate response to surgical treatment such as discectomy

    Poor or inadequate response to surgical treatment such as discectomy. — p. 182

  • AND

    Poor or inadequate response to a functional restoration programme, generally for at least 6 months, in an experienced interdisciplinary clinic including progressive aerobic exercise, strengthening and cognitive behavioural therapy, with documented complianceat least 6 months

    Poor or inadequate response to functional restoration program with treatment generally for at least 6 months. — p. 182

  • AND

    Remedial surgery inadvisable or not feasible

    Remedial surgery inadvisable or not feasible. — p. 182

Confirmatory Diagnosis

All of the following

  • Major psychiatric disorders have been treated with expected responses

    Major psychiatric disorders have been treated with expected responses. — p. 182

  • AND

    Successful independent psychological evaluation by a psychologist specialising in chronic pain, not employed by the requesting or treating physicians

    The psychological evaluation should be performed by a practitioner who is not employed by the requesting or treating physicians. — p. 182

  • AND

    Willingness to stop inappropriate drug use before implantation

    Willingness to stop inappropriate drug use before implantation. — p. 182

  • AND

    No indication that secondary gain is directly influencing pain or disability complaints

    No indication that secondary gain is directly influencing pain or disability complaints. — p. 182

  • AND

    Ability to give informed consent for the procedure

    Ability to give informed consent for the procedure. — p. 182

Surgical Considerations

Any one of the following

  • Implantable spinal cord stimulator

    Spinal cord stimulators are not recommended for treatment of acute, subacute, chronic low back pain, radicular pain syndromes or failed back surgery syndrome. — p. 180

    All of the following:

    • Successful trial of a temporary external stimulator with at least 50% pain reduction, and reduced opioid or other medication use, or functional improvementat least 50

      Successful results of at least 50% pain reduction from a trial of a temporary external stimulator of approximately 2-3 days — p. 182

    • AND

      The guideline does not recommend this device, and Table 11's criteria do not change that

      Spinal cord stimulators are not recommended for treatment of acute, subacute, chronic low back pain, radicular pain syndromes or failed back surgery syndrome. — p. 180

Not recommended. Table 11's nine selection criteria are the guideline's description of a highly select candidate, not a route to authorisation — the recommendation stands whether or not they are met. Document all nine anyway: they are what the request will be judged on, and criteria 3, 5 and 9 (six months of interdisciplinary functional restoration, an independent psychological evaluation, and a successful temporary trial) are the ones requests most often lack.

Reviewing this for COA, or think a criterion is wrong?