The Use of Epidural Corticosteroids for Cervical Radiculopathy: An Interlaminar Versus Transforaminal Approach

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/146929/1/pmr2178.pd

Yoga and pilates in the management of low back pain

Many interventions for the management of low back pain exist, however most have modest efficacy at best, and there are few with clearly demonstrated benefits once pain becomes chronic. Therapeutic exercise, on the other hand, does appear to have significant benefits for managing patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP) in terms of decreasing pain and improving function. In addition, because chronic pain is complex and does not fit a simple model, there have also been numerous trials investigating and demonstrating the efficacy of multidisciplinary pain programs for CLBP. It follows that interventions that treat more than one aspect of LBP would have significant benefits for this patient population. Yoga and Pilates which have, both been gaining in popularity over the last decade are two mind–body exercise interventions that address both the physical and mental aspects of pain with core strengthening, flexibility, and relaxation. There has been a slow evolution of these nontraditional exercise regimens into treatment paradigms for LBP, although few studies examining their effects have been published. The following article will focus on the scientific and theoretical basis of using yoga and Pilates in the management of CLBP

Image-Guided Injections of the Hip

The authors present a technique paper on the utilization of both ultrasound and fluoroscopy guidance for injections about the hip joint.&nbsp; This review draws from specialists including physiatry, family medicine and orthopaedic surgery.&nbsp; We hope the editors and reviewers find this document beneficial to the readership, especially those practicing musculoskeletal medicine and may use this information when performing hip injections.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p

Feasibility and acceptability of a telemedicine triage model among Medicaid patients with low back pain referred to a spine center

Background: The data for primary triage via telemedicine for spine related conditions are sparse but has potential to improve access, quality of care, and offer significant cost savings for Medicaid insured patients who have very limited access to care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a telehealth triage framework using synchronous video conferencing appointments. Methods: This is a prospective cohort feasibility study conducted within an academic spine center in the United States. Participants include Medicaid insured patients referred to an academic spine center for low back pain. We collected demographic information, a spine red flag survey, a patient satisfaction survey and demand and implementation feasibility metrics. Participants completed a demographic and red-flag survey followed by a telehealth spine appointment with a physiatrist. Immediately after the appointment, the participant completed a satisfaction survey. Results: Nineteen patients met inclusion criteria but declined telehealth either due to preference for in-person appointment or lack of comfort with technology. Thirty-three participants enrolled and attended their initial telehealth appointment. Few participants reporting 1 or more red flag symptom also screened positive during their subsequent telehealth evaluation with the physician (n=7/28). Participant satisfaction was high across all domains including ease of scheduling, efficiency of virtual check in, ability to report their symptoms fully and accurately to the provider, imaging review, explanation of diagnosis and treatment plan. Most participants (n=19/20, 95%) would recommend an initial telehealth appointment. Conclusions: The telehealth framework used was feasible and provided an acceptable form of care for Medicaid patients who were interested and able to participate in this form of care. Our acceptability results are promising but should be interpreted with caution given the proportion of patients who declined to participate

Effectiveness of Physical Therapy Combined With Epidural Steroid Injection for Individuals With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Parallel-Group Trial

Objective: To examine the effectiveness of epidural steroid injection (ESI) and back education with and without physical therapy (PT) in individuals with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Design: Randomized clinical trial. Setting: Orthopedic spine clinics. Participants: A total of 390 individuals were screened with 60 eligible and randomly selected to receive ESI and education with or without PT (N=54). Interventions: A total of 54 individuals received 1-3 injections and education in a 10-week intervention period, with 31 receiving injections and education only (ESI) and 23 additionally receiving 8-10 sessions of multimodal PT (ESI+PT). Main Outcome Measures: Disability, pain, quality of life, and global rating of change were collected at 10 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year and analyzed using linear mixed model analysis. Results: No significant difference was found between ESI and ESI+PT in the Oswestry Disability Index at any time point, although the sample had significant improvements at 10 weeks (P\u3c.001; 95% confidence interval [CI], −18.01 to −5.51) and 1 year (P=.01; 95% CI, −14.57 to −2.03) above minimal clinically important difference. Significant differences in the RAND 36-Item Short Form Health Survey 1.0 were found for ESI+PT at 10 weeks with higher emotional role function (P=.03; 95% CI, −49.05 to −8.01), emotional well-being (P=.02; 95% CI, −19.52 to -2.99), and general health perception (P=.05; 95% CI, −17.20 to −.78). Conclusions: Epidural steroid injection plus PT was not superior to ESI alone for reducing disability in individuals with LSS. Significant benefit was found for the addition of PT related to quality of life factors of emotional function, emotional well-being, and perception of general health

Systemic effects of epidural steroid injections for spinal stenosis

This analysis of the lumbar epidural steroid injections for spinal stenosis multicenter randomized controlled trial data identifies the degree of and risk factors for cortisol suppression after epidural steroid injections in older adults with spinal stenosis. Four hundred patients aged 50 years and older with back or leg pain and central lumbar spinal stenosis completed baseline demographic and psychosocial measures. Morning serum cortisol levels were measured at baseline and 3 weeks after initial injection. Patients were randomized to receive epidural injections of either local anesthetic with corticosteroid (n = 200) or local anesthetic only (n = 200). The specific corticosteroid was chosen at the treating physician\u27s discretion (methylprednisolone, betamethasone, triamcinolone, or dexamethasone). Thirty-two patients (20.3%) treated with corticosteroid experienced cortisol reduction at 3 weeks of \u3e50% compared with 10 patients (6.7%) treated with lidocaine only (adjusted treatment effect = 3.5, 95% confidence interval: 1.6-7.9, P = 0.002). The effect on 3-week cortisol changes did not differ by demographic or patient-level characteristics. Those treated with methylprednisolone or triamcinolone had an average 3-week cortisol reduction of 41.0% (P = 0.005) and 41.6% (P \u3c 0.001) from baseline, respectively, whereas patients treated with betamethasone or dexamethasone were not significantly different than comparable patients in the lidocaine arm. The higher rates of cortisol suppression at 3 weeks in those receiving epidural corticosteroid injections, particularly with longer-acting insoluble corticosteroid formulations, are consistent with sustained systemic absorption of corticosteroid