초록 ▼

A programming device used to program delivery of therapy to a patient by a medical device, such as an implantable neurostimulator or pump, maintains or accesses a programming history for the patient. The programming history may take the form of a record of programs, e.g., combinations of therapy par

A programming device used to program delivery of therapy to a patient by a medical device, such as an implantable neurostimulator or pump, maintains or accesses a programming history for the patient. The programming history may take the form of a record of programs, e.g., combinations of therapy parameters, tested during one or more prior programming sessions. The programming device may analyze, or otherwise use the programming history to provide guidance information to a user, such as a clinician, which may assist the user in more quickly identifying one or more desirable programs during a current programming session.

대표청구항 ▼

1. A method comprising: analyzing, with one or more processors, a programming history stored in a memory, wherein the programming history includes information describing therapy programs tested on a patient during at least one prior programming session, wherein the information for each of the progra

1. A method comprising: analyzing, with one or more processors, a programming history stored in a memory, wherein the programming history includes information describing therapy programs tested on a patient during at least one prior programming session, wherein the information for each of the programs includes information describing parameters that define delivery of therapy for the respective program, usage information for the respective program, and rating information for the respective program, wherein analyzing the programming history comprises identifying a correlation between a parameter value for at least one parameter that defines delivery of therapy and at least one of an effect or an efficacy of the parameter value based on at least one of the rating information stored within the programming history for at least two different therapy programs or the usage information stored within the programming history for the at least two different therapy programs, wherein each of the at least two different programs includes at least two different parameters that define delivery of the therapy for the respective program, and wherein the at least two different parameters for each of the at least two different programs includes the at least one parameter; andproviding, with the one or more processors, guidance information to a user based on the correlation to guide the selection of therapy programs during a current programming session. 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the programs within the programming history comprise neurostimulation therapy programs, and the parameters for each of the programs include an electrode configuration and stimulation pulse parameters. 3. The method of claim 1, wherein the programs within the programming history comprise pump infusion programs, and the parameters for each of the programs include at least one of flow rates, agent types, agent concentrations, or infusion types. 4. The method of claim 1, wherein the information stored for each of the programs within the programming history includes diary entries collected during use of the program by the patient. 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the information stored for each of the programs within the programming history includes clinician comments regarding the program. 6. The method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the programming history comprises: comparing program parameters entered by the user while attempting to create a new program to the information stored within the programming history; andidentifying at least one program within the programming history based on the comparison,wherein providing guidance information comprises presenting the identified program to the user. 7. The method of claim 6, wherein providing guidance information further comprises presenting at least one of the rating information, the usage information, or diary entries associated with the identified program to the user. 8. The method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the programming history comprises: comparing program parameters entered by the user while attempting to create a new program to the information stored within the programming history; anddetermining that the new program or a program parameter value is blacklisted,wherein providing guidance information comprises providing an indication that the new program or parameter value is blacklisted to the user. 9. The method of claim 8, wherein determining that a program parameter value is blacklisted comprises determining that an electrode is blacklisted. 10. The method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the programming history comprises identifying at least one parameter value that has been under tested, and providing guidance information comprises identifying the under tested parameter value to the user. 11. The method of claim 1, wherein providing guidance information comprises presenting information describing the correlation to the user. 12. The method of claim 1, wherein providing guidance information comprises presenting an untested program to the user based on the correlation. 13. The method of claim 1, wherein providing guidance information comprises modifying a program testing protocol based on the correlation. 14. The method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the programming history further comprises analyzing the programming histories for a plurality of patients, and identifying the correlation between the parameter value and at least one of the effect or the efficacy of the parameter value based on at least one of the rating information or the usage information comprises identifying the correlation within the programming histories for the plurality of patients. 15. The method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the programming history comprises: redelivering therapy based on a program during a current programming session that was previously delivered during a prior programming session;collecting rating information after redelivery of the therapy based on the program;comparing the rating information to previously collected rating information stored for the program within the programming history; andidentifying a condition of at least one of a medical device and the patient based on the comparison, andwherein providing guidance information comprises indicating the condition to the user. 16. The method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the programming history comprises performing a statistical analysis to identify the correlation. 17. The method of claim 1, wherein analyzing the programming history comprises performing a pattern matching analysis to identify the correlation. 18. The method of claim 1, wherein the correlation between the parameter value for at least one parameter and at least one of an effect or an efficacy of the parameter value comprises at least one of a correlation between the parameter value and one or more efficacy scores, a correlation between the parameter value and one or more side effects, a correlation between the parameter value and a particular severity of one or more side effects, or a correlation between the parameter value and an amount of out of clinic use for the parameter value. 19. A system comprising: a user interface;a memory that stores a programming history, wherein the programming history includes information describing therapy programs tested on a patient during at least one prior programming session, and the information stored for each of the programs includes information describing parameters that define delivery of therapy for the respective program, usage information for the respective program, and rating information for the respective program; anda processor that analyzes the programming history, identifies a correlation, during the analysis, between a parameter value for at least one parameter that defines delivery of therapy and at least one of an effect or an efficacy of the parameter value based on at least one of the rating information stored within the programming history for at least two different therapy programs or the usage information stored within the programming history for the at least two different therapy programs, and provides guidance information to a user via the user interface based on the correlation to guide the selection of therapy programs during a current programming session, wherein each of the at least two different programs includes at least two different parameters that define delivery of the therapy for the respective program, and wherein the at least two different parameters for each of the at least two different programs includes the at least one parameter. 20. The system of claim 19, wherein the programs within the programming history comprise neurostimulation therapy programs, and the parameters for each of the programs include an electrode configuration and stimulation pulse parameters. 21. The system of claim 19, wherein the programs within the programming history comprise pump infusion programs, and the parameters for each of the programs include at least one of flow rates, agent types, agent concentrations, or infusion types. 22. The system of claim 19, wherein the information stored for each of the programs within the programming history includes diary entries collected during use of the program by the patient. 23. The system of claim 19, wherein the information stored for each of the programs within the programming history includes clinician comments regarding the program. 24. The system of claim 19, wherein the processor compares program parameters entered by the user via the user interface while attempting to create a new program to the information stored within the programming history, identifies at least one program within the programming history based on the comparison, and provides guidance information by presenting the identified program to the user via the user interface. 25. The system of claim 24, wherein the processor further presents at least one of the rating information, the usage information, or diary entries associated with the identified program to the user via the user interface. 26. The system of claim 19, wherein the processor compares program parameters entered by the user via the user interface while attempting to create a new program to the information stored within the programming history, determines that the new program or a program parameter value is blacklisted, and provides guidance information by providing an indication that the new program or parameter value is blacklisted to the user via the user interface. 27. The system o f claim 26, wherein the processor determines that an electrode is blacklisted. 28. The system of claim 19, wherein the processor identifies at least one parameter value that has been under tested, and provides guidance information by identifying the under tested parameter value to the user via the user interface. 29. The system of claim 19, wherein the processor provides guidance information by presenting information describing the correlation to the user via the user interface. 30. The system of claim 19, wherein the processor provides guidance information by presenting an untested program to the user based on the correlation via the user interface. 31. The system of claim 19, wherein the processor provides guidance information by modifying a program testing protocol based on the correlation. 32. The system of claim 19, wherein the processor analyzes the programming histories for a plurality of patients, and identifies the correlation between a parameter value and at least one of the effect or the efficacy of the parameter value based on at least one of rating information or usage information within the programming histories for the plurality of patients. 33. The system of claim 19, wherein the processor controls redelivery of a therapy based on a program during a current programming session that was previously delivered during a prior programming session, collects rating information after redelivery of the therapy based on the program, compares the rating information to previously collected rating information stored for the program within the programming history, identifies a condition of at least one of a medical device and the patient based on the comparison, and provides guidance information by indicating the condition to the user via the user interface. 34. The system of claim 19, further comprising a programming device, wherein the processor, memory and user interlace comprise a processor, memory and user interface of the programming device. 35. A computer-readable medium comprising instructions that cause a programmable processor to: analyze a programming history stored in a memory, wherein the programming history includes information describing therapy programs tested on a patient during at least one prior programming session, wherein the information for each of the programs includes information describing parameters that define delivery of therapy for the respective program, usage information for the respective program, and rating information for the respective program, wherein the instructions that cause the programmable processor to analyze the programming history comprise instructions that cause the programmable processor to identify a correlation between a parameter value for at least one parameter that defines delivery of therapy and at least one of an effect or an efficacy of the parameter value based on at least one of the rating information stored within the programming history for at least two different therapy programs or the usage information stored within the programming history for the at least two different therapy programs, wherein each of the at least two different programs includes at least two different parameters that define delivery of the therapy for the respective program, and wherein the at least two different parameters for each of the at least two different programs includes the at least one parameter; andprovide guidance information to a user based on the correlation to guide the selection of therapy programs during a current programming session. 36. The computer-readable medium of claim 35, wherein the instructions that cause the programmable processor to analyze the programming history comprise instructions that cause the programmable processor to: compare program parameters entered by the user while attempting to create a new program to the information stored within the programming history; andidentify at least one program within the programming history based on the comparison,wherein the instructions that cause a programmable processor to provide guidance information comprise instructions that cause a programmable processor to present the identified program to the user. 37. The computer-readable medium of claim 35, wherein the instructions that cause the programmable processor to analyze the programming history comprise instructions that cause the programmable processor to: compare program parameters entered by the user while attempting to create a new program to the information stored within the programming history; anddetermine that the new program or a program parameter value is blacklisted,wherein the instructions that cause a programmable processor to provide guidance information comprise instructions that cause a programmable processor to provide an indication that the new program or parameter value is blacklisted to the user. 38. The computer-readable medium of claim 35, wherein the instructions that cause the programmable processor to analyze the programming history comprise instructions that cause the programmable processor to identify at least one parameter value that has been under tested, and the instructions that cause a programmable processor to provide guidance information comprise instructions that cause a programmable processor to identify the under tested parameter value to the user. 39. The computer-readable medium of claim 35, wherein the instructions that cause the programmable processor to analyze the programming history comprise instructions that cause the programmable processor to identify the correlation between the parameter value and at least one of the effect or the efficacy of the parameter value based on at least one of the rating information or the usage information stored within the programming histories for a plurality of patients. 40. The computer-readable medium of claim 35, wherein the instructions that cause the programmable processor to analyze the programming history comprise instructions that cause the programmable processor to: control redelivery of a therapy based on a program during a current programming session that was previously delivered during a prior programming session;collect rating information after redelivery of the therapy based on the program;compare the rating information to previously collected rating information stored for the program within the programming history; andidentify a condition of at least one of a medical device and the patient based on the comparison,wherein the instructions that cause a programmable processor to provide guidance information comprise instructions that cause a programmable processor to indicate the condition to the user. 41. A method comprising: analyzing, with one or more processors, a programming history stored in a memory, wherein the programming history includes information describing therapy programs tested on a patient during at least one prior programming session, and the information for each of the programs includes information describing parameters that define delivery of therapy for the respective program and rating information for the respective program;comparing, with the one or more processors, program parameters entered by a user while attempting to create a new program to the information stored within the programming history;identifying, with the one or more processors, at least one program within the programming history based on the comparison; andpresenting, with the one or more processors, the identified program as guidance information to the user to guide the selection of therapy programs during a current programming session. 42. The method of claim 41, wherein presenting the identified program further comprises presenting at least one of the rating information, usage information, or diary entries associated with the identified program to the user. 43. A method comprising: analyzing, with one or more processors, a programming history stored in a memory, wherein the programming history includes information describing therapy programs tested on a patient during at least one prior programming session, and the information for each of the programs includes information describing parameters that define delivery of therapy for the respective program and rating information for the respective program;identifying, with the one or more processors, at least one parameter value as being an under tested parameter value; andpresenting, with the one or more processors, the under tested parameter value as guidance information to a user to guide the selection of therapy programs during a current programming session. 44. The method or claim 43, wherein identifying at least one parameter value as being an under tested parameter value comprises identifying at least one parameter value that has not been tested.