Interventional therapies, surgery, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation for low back pain: an evidence-based clinical practice guideline from the American Pain Society

[Lumbar spinal stenosis. From diagnosis to correct therapy]

The number of patients with a diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is steadily increasing and the expectations of patients are high; however, valid data for an appropriate therapy are lacking. Treatment is mostly the result of the surgeon's experience and the clinical focus. The findings in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) often do not correlate with the patient's symptoms. It is proposed that treatment should start with a conservative multimodal approach. Increased pain with neurogenic claudication symptoms under conservative treatment should be treated surgically. Absolute indications for surgery, such as a conus cauda syndrome are rare. The goal of all surgical procedures is to decompress the spinal canal without compromising the stability of the motion segment. This can also make an additional fusion necessary.

Minimally invasive procedures for neuropathic pain

Neuropathic pain is "pain arising as a direct consequence of a lesion or disease affecting the somatosensory system". The prevalence of neuropathic pain ranges from 7 to 11% of the population and minimally invasive procedures have been used to both diagnose and treat neuropathic pain. Diagnostic procedures consist of nerve blocks aimed to isolate the peripheral nerve implicated, whereas therapeutic interventions either modify or destroy nerve function. Procedures that modify how nerves function include epidural steroid injections, peripheral nerve blocks and sympathetic nerve blocks. Neuroablative procedures include radiofrequency ablation, cryoanalgesia and neurectomies. Currently, neuromodulation with peripheral nerve stimulators and spinal cord stimulators are the most evidence-based treatments of neuropathic pain.

Intraforaminal ozone therapy and particular side effects: preliminary results and early warning

BACKGROUND

The term "low back pain syndrome" represents a complex nosological entity. The therapeutic approach is often only symptomatic and not etiologic.

METHODS

Since 2013, 186 patients (97 males and 89 females, mean age 59.8 years) have undergone microsurgery for lumbar disc hernia or lumbar segmental stenosis. Among these patients, 23 had been previously treated with ozone therapy by the intraforaminal approach and 28 by intraforaminal steroid injections in other hospitals between 12 and 24 months before our clinical evaluation. These patients received 16 applications in an 8-week period (standard therapy).

RESULTS

During the surgery, many hard adhesions between the soft tissues and bony structures were unexpectedly discovered. In particular, it was noted that the root contracted and had firm adhesions to the dural sac and/or fragmented disc, which were difficult to resolve. These specific pathological patterns were observed only in the patients who received ozone injections by the intraforaminal approach. We did not find any pathological abnormalities in the patients who did not receive any injections or who received intraforaminal steroid injections. Thus, we could exclude that the tissue damage was due to the mechanical action of the needle.

CONCLUSION

It is important to assert that ozone therapy procedures can be associated with several major complications. Therefore, performing a revision of the guidelines and protocols for ozone therapy application is indispensable.

Does provocative discography cause clinically important injury to the lumbar intervertebral disc? A 10-year matched cohort study

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

Provocative discography, an invasive diagnostic procedure involving disc puncture with pressurization, is a test for presumptive discogenic pain in the lumbar spine. The clinical validity of this test is unproven. Data from multiple animal studies confirm that disc puncture causes early disc degeneration. A recent study identified radiographic disc degeneration on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) performed 10 years later in human subjects exposed to provocative discography. The clinical effect of this disc degeneration after provocative discography is unknown.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical effects of lumbar provocative discography on patients subjected to this evaluation method.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

A prospective, 10-year matched cohort study.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Subjects (n=75) without current low back pain (LBP) problems were recruited to participate in a study of provocative discography at the L3-S1 discs. A closely matched control cohort was simultaneously recruited to undergo a similar evaluation except for discography injections.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome variables were diagnostic imaging events and lumbar disc surgery events. The secondary outcome variables were serious LBP events, disability events, and medical visits.

METHODS

The discography subjects and control subjects were followed by serial protocol evaluations at 1, 2, 5, and 10 years after enrollment. The lumbar disc surgery events and diagnostic imaging (computed tomography (CT) or MRI) events were recorded. In addition, the interval and cumulative lumbar spine events were recorded.

RESULTS

Of the 150 subjects enrolled, 71 discography subjects and 72 control subjects completed the baseline evaluation. At 10-year follow-up, 57 discography and 53 control subjects completed all interval surveillance evaluations. There were 16 lumbar surgeries in the discography group, compared with four in the control group. Medical visits, CT/MRI examinations, work loss, and prolonged back pain episodes were all more frequent in the discography group compared with control subjects.

CONCLUSION

The disc puncture and pressurized injection performed during provocative discography can increase the risk of clinical disc problems in exposed patients.

Brain and behavior changes associated with an abbreviated 4-week mindfulness-based stress reduction course in back pain patients

INTRODUCTION

Mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBSR) reduces depression, anxiety, and pain for people suffering from a variety of illnesses, and there is a growing need to understand the neurobiological networks implicated in self-reported psychological change as a result of training. Combining complementary and alternative treatments such as MBSR with other therapies is helpful; however, the time commitment of the traditional 8-week course may impede accessibility. This pilot study aimed to (1) determine if an abbreviated MBSR course improves symptoms in chronic back pain patients and (2) examine the neural and behavioral correlates of MBSR treatment.

METHODS

Participants were assigned to 4 weeks of weekly MBSR training (n = 12) or a control group (stress reduction reading; n = 11). Self-report ratings and task-based functional MRI were obtained prior to, and after, MBSR training, or at a yoked time point in the control group.

RESULTS

While both groups showed significant improvement in total depression symptoms, only the MBSR group significantly improved in back pain and somatic-affective depression symptoms. The MBSR group also uniquely showed significant increases in regional frontal lobe hemodynamic activity associated with gaining awareness to changes in one's emotional state.

CONCLUSIONS

An abbreviated MBSR course may be an effective complementary intervention that specifically improves back pain symptoms and frontal lobe regulation of emotional awareness, while the traditional 8-week course may be necessary to detect unique improvements in total anxiety and cognitive aspects of depression.

Radiofrequency denervation for chronic low back pain

BACKGROUND

Radiofrequency (RF) denervation, an invasive treatment for chronic low back pain (CLBP), is used most often for pain suspected to arise from facet joints, sacroiliac (SI) joints or discs. Many (uncontrolled) studies have shown substantial variation in its use between countries and continued uncertainty regarding its effectiveness.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review is to assess the effectiveness of RF denervation procedures for the treatment of patients with CLBP. The current review is an update of the review conducted in 2003.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, three other databases, two clinical trials registries and the reference lists of included studies from inception to May 2014 for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) fulfilling the inclusion criteria. We updated this search in June 2015, but we have not yet incorporated these results.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs of RF denervation for patients with CLBP who had a positive response to a diagnostic block or discography. We applied no language or date restrictions.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently selected RCTs, extracted data and assessed risk of bias (RoB) and clinical relevance using standardised forms. We performed meta-analyses with clinically homogeneous studies and assessed the quality of evidence for each outcome using the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.

MAIN RESULTS

In total, we included 23 RCTs (N = 1309), 13 of which (56%) had low RoB. We included both men and women with a mean age of 50.6 years. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence as very low to moderate. Twelve studies examined suspected facet joint pain, five studies disc pain, two studies SI joint pain, two studies radicular CLBP, one study suspected radiating low back pain and one study CLBP with or without suspected radiation. Overall, moderate evidence suggests that facet joint RF denervation has a greater effect on pain compared with placebo over the short term (mean difference (MD) -1.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.28 to -0.67). Low-quality evidence indicates that facet joint RF denervation is more effective than placebo for function over the short term (MD -5.53, 95% CI -8.66 to -2.40) and over the long term (MD -3.70, 95% CI -6.94 to -0.47). Evidence of very low to low quality shows that facet joint RF denervation is more effective for pain than steroid injections over the short (MD -2.23, 95% CI -2.38 to -2.08), intermediate (MD -2.13, 95% CI -3.45 to -0.81), and long term (MD -2.65, 95% CI -3.43 to -1.88). RF denervation used for disc pain produces conflicting results, with no effects for RF denervation compared with placebo over the short and intermediate term, and small effects for RF denervation over the long term for pain relief (MD -1.63, 95% CI -2.58 to -0.68) and improved function (MD -6.75, 95% CI -13.42 to -0.09). Lack of evidence of short-term effectiveness undermines the clinical plausibility of intermediate-term or long-term effectiveness. When RF denervation is used for SI joint pain, low-quality evidence reveals no differences from placebo in effects on pain (MD -2.12, 95% CI -5.45 to 1.21) and function (MD -14.06, 95% CI -30.42 to 2.30) over the short term, and one study shows a small effect on both pain and function over the intermediate term. RF denervation is an invasive procedure that can cause a variety of complications. The quality and size of original studies were inadequate to permit assessment of how often complications occur.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The review authors found no high-quality evidence suggesting that RF denervation provides pain relief for patients with CLBP. Similarly, we identified no convincing evidence to show that this treatment improves function. Overall, the current evidence for RF denervation for CLBP is very low to moderate in quality; high-quality evidence is lacking. High-quality RCTs with larger patient samples are needed, as are data on long-term effects.

Evaluation of lung volumes, vital capacity and respiratory muscle strength after cervical, thoracic and lumbar spinal surgery

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE

Studies have shown that physiopathological changes to the respiratory system can occur following thoracic and abdominal surgery. Laminectomy is considered to be a peripheral surgical procedure, but it is possible that thoracic spinal surgery exerts a greater influence on lung function. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pulmonary volumes and maximum respiratory pressures of patients undergoing cervical, thoracic or lumbar spinal surgery.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Prospective study in a tertiary-level university hospital.

METHODS

Sixty-three patients undergoing laminectomy due to diagnoses of tumors or herniated discs were evaluated. Vital capacity, tidal volume, minute ventilation and maximum respiratory pressures were evaluated preoperatively and on the first and second postoperative days. Possible associations between the respiratory variables and the duration of the operation, surgical diagnosis and smoking status were investigated.

RESULTS

Vital capacity and maximum inspiratory pressure presented reductions on the first postoperative day (20.9% and 91.6%, respectively) for thoracic surgery (P = 0.01), and maximum expiratory pressure showed reductions on the first postoperative day in cervical surgery patients (15.3%; P = 0.004). The incidence of pulmonary complications was 3.6%.

CONCLUSIONS

There were reductions in vital capacity and maximum respiratory pressures during the postoperative period in patients undergoing laminectomy. Surgery in the thoracic region was associated with greater reductions in vital capacity and maximum inspiratory pressure, compared with cervical and lumbar surgery. Thus, surgical manipulation of the thoracic region appears to have more influence on pulmonary function and respiratory muscle action.

Massage for low-back pain

BACKGROUND

Low-back pain (LBP) is one of the most common and costly musculoskeletal problems in modern society. It is experienced by 70% to 80% of adults at some time in their lives. Massage therapy has the potential to minimize pain and speed return to normal function.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of massage therapy for people with non-specific LBP.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched PubMed to August 2014, and the following databases to July 2014: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINAHL, LILACS, Index to Chiropractic Literature, and Proquest Dissertation Abstracts. We also checked reference lists. There were no language restrictions used.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomized controlled trials of adults with non-specific LBP classified as acute, sub-acute or chronic. Massage was defined as soft-tissue manipulation using the hands or a mechanical device. We grouped the comparison groups into two types: inactive controls (sham therapy, waiting list, or no treatment), and active controls (manipulation, mobilization, TENS, acupuncture, traction, relaxation, physical therapy, exercises or self-care education).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures and followed CBN guidelines. Two independent authors performed article selection, data extraction and critical appraisal.

MAIN RESULTS

In total we included 25 trials (3096 participants) in this review update. The majority was funded by not-for-profit organizations. One trial included participants with acute LBP, and the remaining trials included people with sub-acute or chronic LBP (CLBP). In three trials massage was done with a mechanical device, and the remaining trials used only the hands. The most common type of bias in these studies was performance and measurement bias because it is difficult to blind participants, massage therapists and the measuring outcomes. We judged the quality of the evidence to be "low" to "very low", and the main reasons for downgrading the evidence were risk of bias and imprecision. There was no suggestion of publication bias. For acute LBP, massage was found to be better than inactive controls for pain ((SMD -1.24, 95% CI -1.85 to -0.64; participants = 51; studies = 1)) in the short-term, but not for function ((SMD -0.50, 95% CI -1.06 to 0.06; participants = 51; studies = 1)). For sub-acute and chronic LBP, massage was better than inactive controls for pain ((SMD -0.75, 95% CI -0.90 to -0.60; participants = 761; studies = 7)) and function (SMD -0.72, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.39; 725 participants; 6 studies; ) in the short-term, but not in the long-term; however, when compared to active controls, massage was better for pain, both in the short ((SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.62 to -0.13; participants = 964; studies = 12)) and long-term follow-up ((SMD -0.40, 95% CI -0.80 to -0.01; participants = 757; studies = 5)), but no differences were found for function (both in the short and long-term). There were no reports of serious adverse events in any of these trials. Increased pain intensity was the most common adverse event reported in 1.5% to 25% of the participants.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We have very little confidence that massage is an effective treatment for LBP. Acute, sub-acute and chronic LBP had improvements in pain outcomes with massage only in the short-term follow-up. Functional improvement was observed in participants with sub-acute and chronic LBP when compared with inactive controls, but only for the short-term follow-up. There were only minor adverse effects with massage.

Report of the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low Back Pain

Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific, and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. The NIH Pain Consortium therefore charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimal data set to describe research participants (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. The RTF believes these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. We expect the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document, and undergo continual improvement.

PERSPECTIVE

A Task Force was convened by the NIH Pain Consortium, with the goal of developing research standards for chronic low back pain. The results included recommendations for definitions, a minimal dataset, reporting outcomes, and future research. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes.

Epidural Corticosteroid Injections for Radiculopathy and Spinal Stenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Use of epidural corticosteroid injections is increasing.

PURPOSE

To review evidence on the benefits and harms of epidural corticosteroid injections in adults with radicular low back pain or spinal stenosis of any duration.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid MEDLINE (through May 2015), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, prior systematic reviews, and reference lists.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized trials of epidural corticosteroid injections versus placebo interventions, or that compared epidural injection techniques, corticosteroids, or doses.

DATA EXTRACTION

Dual extraction and quality assessment of individual studies, which were used to determine the overall strength of evidence (SOE).

DATA SYNTHESIS

30 placebo-controlled trials evaluated epidural corticosteroid injections for radiculopathy, and 8 trials were done for spinal stenosis. For radiculopathy, epidural corticosteroids were associated with greater immediate-term reduction in pain (weighted mean difference on a scale of 0 to 100, -7.55 [95% CI, -11.4 to -3.74]; SOE, moderate), function (standardized mean difference after exclusion of an outlier trial, -0.33 [CI, -0.56 to -0.09]; SOE, low), and short-term surgery risk (relative risk, 0.62 [CI, 0.41 to 0.92]; SOE, low). Effects were below predefined minimum clinically important difference thresholds, and there were no longer-term benefits. Limited evidence showed no clear effects of technical factors, patient characteristics, or comparator interventions on estimates. There were no clear effects of epidural corticosteroid injections for spinal stenosis (SOE, low to moderate). Serious harms were rare, but harms reporting was suboptimal (SOE, low).

LIMITATIONS

The review was restricted to English-language studies. Some meta-analyses were based on small numbers of trials (particularly for spinal stenosis), and most trials had methodological shortcomings.

CONCLUSION

Epidural corticosteroid injections for radiculopathy were associated with immediate reductions in pain and function. However, benefits were small and not sustained, and there was no effect on long-term surgery risk. Limited evidence suggested no effectiveness for spinal stenosis.

The Effect of Epidural Steroid Injection on Postoperative Outcome in Patients From the Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Outcome Study

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of data from patients participating in the Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Outcome Study (LSOS).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of LSOS was to assess clinical outcomes after surgical or nonoperative treatment in patients with and without prior epidural steroid injections.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Epidural steroid injections (ESI), a common treatment modality, reduce symptoms in the short-term, but according to a subgroup analysis from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) they reduce the amount of improvement after subsequent surgical or nonoperative treatment.

METHODS

The data of 281 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who had completed baseline and 6-month follow-up assessments were analyzed. Patients completed the Spinal Stenosis Measure (SSM). Changes in the SSM scores from baseline to follow-up were compared between patients with and without prior ESI, for the surgical and nonsurgical treatment groups.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) age of the patients was 75 (8.7) years. 229 patients underwent surgery and 111 of these had received an ESI in the 12 months before surgery. Of the 52 patients treated nonoperatively, 29 had received a prior ESI. The unadjusted changes (improvement) in the SSM-symptom scores between baseline and 6 months' follow up were: surgery and prior ESI 0.95, surgery and no prior ESI 0.78 (P = 0.15); no surgery and prior ESI 0.28, no surgery and no prior ESI 0.29 (P = 0.85). When adjusted for confounding factors, the reduction in SSM-symptom score was greater for surgery than for nonoperative treatment by 0.41 points (P < 0.001); the effect of having had an ESI prior to study entry was -0.08 (P = 0.40).

CONCLUSION

The analysis of outcomes in the LSOS cohort provided no evidence that ESIs have a negative effect on the short-term outcome of surgery or nonoperative treatment in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Occupational therapists' shared decision-making behaviors with patients having persistent pain in a work rehabilitation context: A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVE

In a work rehabilitation context, we assessed occupational therapists' (OTs) shared decision-making (SDM) behaviors with individuals having persistent pain and explored factors influencing SDM behaviors.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study that used audio-recordings of work rehabilitation consultations between OTs trained in SDM and a convenient sample of patients. Eligible patients were: off work for ≥12 weeks due to persistent pain associated with a musculoskeletal disorder, starting a work rehabilitation program, and French speaking. Transcripts were analyzed using the Observing Patient Involvement in Shared Decision Making (OPTION) instrument and assessed patients' decisional conflict and socioeconomic status.

RESULTS

Of 15 OTs trained in SDM, 11 (90% female), provided audiotaped SDM meetings with 37 patients (40.5% female; aged 18-62 years). Their average OPTION score was 53.94 out of 100 (SD=9.68; range 35.42-70.83), indicating basic skills. Significant factors associated with OPTION scores (R (2)adjusted=21.7%) were the interview length (p=0.008) and level of patient education (p=0.038).

CONCLUSION

Basic SDM behaviors were integrated in the practice of OTs trained in SDM.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Evaluating SDM behaviors is a step toward providing OTs with performance feedback toward achieving client-centered care.

Report of the NIH Task Force on research standards for chronic low back pain

OBJECTIVE

Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific, and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus.

DESIGN

Expert panel and preliminary evaluation of key recommendations.

METHODS

The NIH Pain Consortium charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel developed a 3-stage process, each with a 2-day meeting.

RESULTS

The panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimal data set to describe research subjects (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals.

CONCLUSION

The RTF believes these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes. We expect the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document, and undergo continual improvement.

PERSPECTIVE

A task force was convened by the NIH Pain Consortium with the goal of developing research standards for chronic low back pain. The results included recommendations for definitions, a minimum dataset, reporting outcomes, and future research. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes.

Effects of Theodore Millon's Teaching, Mentorship, Theory, and Scientific Contributions on Health Psychology and Behavioral Medicine Research and Practice

This article summarizes the impact of Theodore Millon's work on the disciplines of health psychology and behavioral medicine over the past 5 decades spanning from the late 1960s to present. The article is written from my perspectives as a graduate student mentored by Millon on through my faculty career as a collaborator in test construction and empirical validation research. Several of the most recent entries in this summary reflect projects that were ongoing at the time of his passing, revealing the innovation and visionary spirit that he demonstrated up until the end of his life. Considering that this summary is restricted to Millon's contributions to the disciplines of health psychology and behavioral medicine, this work comprises only a small portion of his larger contribution to the field of psychology and the areas of personality theory and psychological assessment more broadly.

Do Epidural Injections Provide Short- and Long-term Relief for Lumbar Disc Herniation? A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

As part of a comprehensive nonsurgical approach, epidural injections often are used in the management of lumbar disc herniation. Recent guidelines and systematic reviews have reached different conclusions about the efficacy of epidural injections in managing lumbar disc herniation.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In this systematic review, we determined the efficacy (pain relief and functional improvement) of the three anatomic approaches (caudal, lumbar interlaminar, and transforaminal) for epidural injections in the treatment of disc herniation.

METHODS

We performed a literature search from 1966 to June 2013 in PubMed, Cochrane library, US National Guideline Clearinghouse, previous systematic reviews, and cross-references for trials studying all types of epidural injections in managing chronic or chronic and subacute lumbar disc herniation. We wanted only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (either placebo or active controlled) to be included in our analysis, and 66 studies found in our search fulfilled these criteria. We then assessed the methodologic quality of these 66 studies using the Cochrane review criteria for RCTs. Thirty-nine studies were excluded, leaving 23 RCTs of high and moderate methodologic quality for analysis. Evidence for the efficacy of all three approaches for epidural injection under fluoroscopy was strong for short-term (< 6 months) and moderate for long-term (≥ 6 months) based on the Cochrane rating system with five levels of evidence (best evidence synthesis), with strong evidence denoting consistent findings among multiple high-quality RCTs and moderate evidence denoting consistent findings among multiple low-quality RCTs or one high-quality RCT. The primary outcome measure was pain relief, defined as at least 50% improvement in pain or 3-point improvement in pain scores in at least 50% of the patients. The secondary outcome measure was functional improvement, defined as 50% reduction in disability or 30% reduction in the disability scores.

RESULTS

Based on strong evidence for short-term efficacy from multiple high-quality trials and moderate evidence for long-term efficacy from at least one high quality trial, we found that fluoroscopic caudal, lumbar interlaminar, and transforaminal epidural injections were efficacious at managing lumbar disc herniation in terms of pain relief and functional improvement.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that epidural injections performed under fluoroscopy by trained physicians offer improvement in pain and function in well-selected patients with lumbar disc herniation.

Multidisciplinary treatment for rheumatic pain

Chronic pain experienced by patients with rheumatic conditions is recognized to contribute importantly to suffering. Multidisciplinary pain clinics that adhere to the biopsychosocial concept of pain management provide an effective treatment strategy for many with chronic pain. Other than for low back pain and fibromyalgia, little attention has been given to the specific experience of treating those with rheumatic diseases in such a setting. It is, however, reasonable to suggest that many patients with chronic rheumatic pain could benefit from exposure to a multidisciplinary pain treatment programme that incorporates components of education, exercise and activity, as well as psychological techniques and support. Although the specifics of such a treatment will require defining, rheumatologists can look forward to expanded care for their patients with chronic rheumatic pain, and they should be encouraged to become more involved in these clinics.

A randomised, independent groups study investigating the sympathetic nervous system responses to two manual therapy treatments in patients with LBP

Manual therapy (MT) and exercise therapy techniques are commonly utilised, guideline recommended treatment strategies in the management of non-specific low back pain (LBP). Preliminary evidence on asymptomatic participants indicates that two manual therapy techniques; repeated lumbar extension in lying exercise (EIL); and segmental rotational grade V manipulation (manipulation), have significant effects on the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) as detectable with skin conductance (SC) responses. However, it is not known if these responses occur in patients with LBP. A randomised, independent group's design was utilised to investigate the immediate SC responses in 50 patients with LBP of less than 12 weeks duration. Patients received either the manipulation technique (n = 25) or the EIL exercise (n = 25) and SC activity was recorded, in a single treatment session, pre-, peri- and post-treatment. Both treatments resulted in a sympatho-excitatory response during the intervention period with the manipulation technique having a 255% increase (p < 0.005), and the EIL technique a 94% increase (p = 0.019) with both treatments having responses that were sustained into the final rest period (p < 0.005). Between-group comparisons indicate that the manipulation technique had a significantly greater magnitude of effect (p < 0.001). The results support the sympatho-excitatory responses seen in normative studies but challenge the assumption that normative and patient populations are analogous with respect to the magnitude of effect observed and suggest that SC responses may be a feasible, proxy method of detecting dorsal horn sensitisation and neuro-plastic adaptations occurring in the presence of LBP.

Comparison of the lumbar disc herniation patients randomized in SPORT to 6,846 discectomy patients from NSQIP: demographics, perioperative variables, and complications correlate well

BACKGROUND CONTEXT

The Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) is a highly referenced clinical trial that randomized patients with lumbar pathology to receive surgery or continued conservative treatment.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the SPORT lumbar disc herniation cohort and an analogous cohort from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING

This is a retrospective cohort study comparing a national database population to a randomized clinical trial.

PATIENT SAMPLE

Elective lumbar discectomies from NSQIP between 2010 and 2012 were used.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Demographics were compared between the randomized SPORT cohorts (surgical and nonoperative) and NSQIP. Perioperative factors and complications were then compared between SPORT discectomy patients and NSQIP.

METHODS

Using current procedural terminology and International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision codes, all elective lumbar discectomies from NSQIP between 2010 and 2012 were identified. Where possible based on the published data and variables available in each cohort, the two populations were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 6,846 NSQIP discectomy patients were compared with the randomized SPORT surgical and nonoperative cohorts. Demographic comparisons showed that NSQIP patients were older (average age 48.2±14.5 years [mean±standard deviation] vs. 41.7±11.8 and 43.0±11.3 years, respectively [p<.001]) and had higher body mass index (29.6±6.2 kg/m(2) vs. 27.8±5.6 and 28.2±5.4 kg/m(2), respectively [p<.001]). No statistical differences existed for gender or race. Smoking status was not different between the SPORT nonoperative group and NSQIP but was higher in NSQIP compared with SPORT surgical patients (p=.020 by 7%). Comparisons of perioperative factors and complications between the SPORT surgical cohort and NSQIP showed no statistical difference in average operative time, length of stay, deep wound infections, wound dehiscence, total wound complications, or blood transfusions. Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial superficial wound infection rates were higher than NSQIP (p=.029 by 1.4%). As expected, SPORT 1-year reoperation rates were higher than NSQIP 30-day rates (7% vs. 2%, p<.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial lumbar disc herniation results are similar to those from a large national patient sample. Even statistically significant differences would be considered clinically similar. These findings support the generalizability of the SPORT lumbar disc herniation results.

Effectiveness and economic evaluation of chiropractic care for the treatment of low back pain: a systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

Chiropractic care is a common treatment for low back pain (LBP). Previous studies have failed to clarify the relative cost-effectiveness of chiropractic care in comparison with other commonly used approaches because previous attempts to synthetize the economic literature has only included partial economic evaluations. The objective of this project is to estimate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of chiropractic care compared to other commonly used care approaches among adult patients with non-specific LBP.

METHODS/DESIGN

Two systematic reviews will be conducted to identify 1) randomized controlled trials and 2) full economic evaluations of chiropractic care for low back pain compared to standard care provided by other healthcare providers. We will conduct searches in specialized electronic databases for randomized controlled trials and full economic evaluations published between 1990 and 2014 using a combination of keywords and MeSH terms. This will be supplemented by a search of the gray literature. Citations, abstracts, and relevant papers will be screened for eligibility by two reviewers independently. Studies will be critically appraised using 1) the Cochrane risk of bias tool and 2) the Drummond (BMJ) checklist. Results will be summarized using Slavin's qualitative best-evidence synthesis approach. Data relating to the primary outcomes of the effectiveness study will be evaluated for inclusion in meta-analyses. The costs will be standardized to the same currency (USD) and adjusted to the same year for inflation. The incremental cost-effectiveness, incremental net benefit, and relevant confidant intervals will be recalculated in order to facilitate comparison between studies.

DISCUSSION

Our review will evaluate both the clinical effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness associated with chiropractic care for LBP. A more precise estimate of the cost-effectiveness of chiropractic care for LBP relative to other forms of conservative care is needed for decision-makers and third-party payers to offer best care options for LBP. Our results will facilitate evidence-based management of patients with LBP and identify key areas for future research.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

The protocol is registered on PROSPERO ( CRD42014008746 ).

Comparison of 368 patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis from the SPORT trial with 955 from the NSQIP database

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

OBJECTIVE

To compare demographics and perioperative outcomes between the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis arm and a similar population from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

SPORT is a well-known surgical trial that investigated the benefits of surgical versus nonsurgical treatment in patients with various lumbar pathologies. However, the external validity of SPORT demographics and outcomes has not been fully established.

METHODS

Surgical degenerative spondylolisthesis cases were identified from NSQIP between 2010 and 2012. This population was then compared with the SPORT degenerative spondylolisthesis study. These comparisons were based on published data from SPORT and included analyses of demographics, perioperative factors, and complications.

RESULTS

The 368 surgical patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis in SPORT were compared with 955 patients identified in NSQIP. Demographic comparisons were as follows: average age and race (no difference; P > 0.05 for each), sex (9.1% more female patients in SPORT; P = 0.002), smoking status (6.6% more smokers in NSQIP; P = 0.002), and average body mass index (1.1 kg/m greater in NSQIP; P = 0.005). Larger differences were noted in what surgical procedure was performed (P < 0.001), with the most notable difference being that the NSQIP population was much more likely to include interbody fusion than the SPORT population (52.4% vs. 12.5%). Most perioperative factors and complication rates were similar, including average operative time, wound infection, wound dehiscence, postoperative transfusion, and postoperative mortality (no differences; P > 0.05 for each). Average length of stay was shorter in NSQIP compared with SPORT (3.7 vs. 5.8 d; P = 0.042).

CONCLUSION

Though important differences in the distribution of surgical procedures were identified, this study supports the greater generalizability of the surgical SPORT degenerative spondylolisthesis study based on similar demographics and perioperative outcomes when compared with patients from the NSQIP database.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Operationalizing a shared decision making model for work rehabilitation programs: a consensus process

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to design and operationalize shared decision making (SDM) rehabilitation model for worker rehabilitation programs. SDM has previously been shown to improve decision outcomes in patient-health care professional relationships. To date, SDM has not yet been adapted to work rehabilitation, although it could be a valuable approach to better understand and agree on return-to-work decisions.

METHODS

We designed a preliminary model for return-to-work decisions for workers suffering from pain due to musculoskeletal injuries. We submitted the preliminary model and a questionnaire to expert health care professionals. Using the Technique for Research of Information by Animation of a Group of Experts method, a group consensus process was used to discuss and refine the experts' responses to operationalize a model adapted for rehabilitation.

RESULTS

Eleven occupational therapists (three were clinical coordinators) and four psychologists participated in three group consensus sessions. The final version of the model included one general longitudinal objective (the maintenance of a working alliance and assuring mutual comprehension among all stakeholders), and 11 specific objectives: establishing a working alliance, seven in the deliberation phase of the SDM process, and three in the implementation of the decision. Participants also reached consensus on between 1 and 8 indicators per objective.

CONCLUSION

We developed and operationalized an SDM rehabilitation model intended for a return-to-work implementation plan. The next step will be to document its feasibility among the main stakeholders (employer, union, insurer and worker) taking part in decisions about return to work.

Report of the NIH Task Force on research standards for chronic low back pain

Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. Therefore, NIH Pain Consortium charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimum dataset to describe research participants (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. The RTF believes that these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. We expect that the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document and undergo continual improvement.

PERSPECTIVE

A task force was convened by the NIH Pain Consortium with the goal of developing research standards for chronic low back pain. The results included recommendations for definitions, a minimum dataset, reporting outcomes, and future research. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes.

An open-label pilot study of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy in the treatment of failed back surgery syndrome pain

Persistent pain following back surgery remains a major treatment challenge. The primary objective of this open-label exploratory study was to investigate the analgesic effectiveness of pulsed electromagnetic field therapy administered twice daily over a 45-day period in 34 subjects (68% female) with persistent or recurrent pain following back surgery. A secondary goal was to guide the design of future randomized controlled trials that could target responsive subpopulations. All predefined primary and secondary outcomes, including change in pain intensity (PI), physical function (Oswestry Disability Index), analgesic consumption, and overall well-being (Patient Global Impression of Change), are reported. A responder analysis (≥30% reduction in PI versus baseline) was added as a post hoc evaluation. Safety outcomes, as well as results of a cost-avoidance survey, are also summarized. Of the 30 per-protocol subjects who completed the study, 33% reported a clinically meaningful (≥30%) reduction in PI. A higher response rate (60%) was reported for subjects who had undergone discectomy prior to the trial compared to subjects who had undergone other types of surgical interventions (decompression or fusion) without discectomy. Improvements in PI were paralleled by improvements in secondary outcomes. Relative to baseline, responders reported an average 44% and 55% reduction in back PI and leg PI (respectively), and an average 13% improvement in Oswestry Disability Index scores. In the per-protocol population, 50% of responders and 12% of nonresponders reported less analgesia consumption at the end of treatment versus baseline. Sixty-seven percent of per-protocol responders and 0% of nonresponders reported clinically meaningful improvement in overall well-being on the Patient Global Impression of Change scale.

Epidural steroid injections for radicular lumbosacral pain: a systematic review

Most clinical guidelines do not recommend routine use of epidural steroid injections for the management of chronic low back pain. However, many clinicians do not adhere to these guidelines. This comprehensive evidence overview concluded that off-label epidural steroid injections provide small short-term but not long- term leg-pain relief and improvement in function; injection of steroids is no more effective than injection of local anesthetics alone; post-procedural complications are uncommon, but the risk of contamination and serious infections is very high. The evidence does not support routine use of off-label epidural steroid injections in adults with benign radicular lumbosacral pain.

Focus article: report of the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low Back Pain

Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. Therefore, NIH Pain Consortium charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimum dataset to describe research participants (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. The RTF believes that these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. We expect that the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document and undergo continual improvement.

PERSPECTIVE

A task force was convened by the NIH Pain Consortium with the goal of developing research standards for chronic low back pain. The results included recommendations for definitions, a minimum dataset, reporting outcomes, and future research. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes.

[Sporting loads to Spondylodesis of lumbar spine: The return-to-play process]

BACKGROUND

Return to play (RTP) and competition following spinal fusion is of particular importance for athletes. There is a lack of guidelines for decision making in RTP processes.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this work was to provide a systematic review of the criteria and time of return in the RTP decision process for adults undergoing lumbar spinal fusion.

METHODS

Two independent investigators searched MEDLINE using MeSH terms. Targeted outcomes were criteria for return to play decisions and total duration of the RTP process.

RESULTS

So far, no prospective randomized controlled trials on RTP after spinal fusion considering inclusion and exclusion criteria are available. Five of the included studies are based on original data. Most of the identified studies are narrative reviews and, thus, exhibit low evidence levels. In addition to the narrative reviews, one observational study, two expert opinion surveys and two model development studies were found.

CONCLUSION

Based on the literature research, a positive RTP decision can be made if the following criteria are fulfilled: (1) anatomical and functional healing is complete, (2) safety of the athlete and secondary subjects during training and competition is guaranteed, (3) sport-specific skills are regained, and (4) patient is psychosocially ready. The RTP process can often be successfully initiated 6 months after surgery; some patients however, will never manage the return to full-contact sports and/or sports with risk of collision.

Anterior or posterior approach of full-endoscopic cervical discectomy for cervical intervertebral disc herniation? A comparative cohort study

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective comparative cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the outcomes of patients with symptomatic cervical intervertebral disc herniation (CIVDH) treated with full-endoscopic cervical discectomy (FECD) using the anterior approach with those treated with the posterior approach.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The optimal FECD surgical approach for CIVDH remains controversial.

METHODS

From March 2010 to July 2012, a total of 84 consecutive patients with symptomatic single-level CIVDH who underwent FECD using the anterior approach (42 patients) or the posterior approach (42 patients) were enrolled. Patients were assessed neurologically before surgery and followed up at regular outpatient visits. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analogue scale and the modified MacNab criteria. Radiographical follow-up included the static and dynamic cervical plain radiographs, computed tomographic scans, and magnetic resonance images.

RESULTS

In both groups, shorter mean operative time (63.5 min vs. 78.5 min), increased mean volume of disc removal (0.6 g vs. 0.3 g), larger mean decrease in the final postoperative mean intervertebral vertical height (1.0 mm vs. 0.5 mm), and longer mean hospital stay (4.9 d vs. 4.5 d) were observed in the anterior full-endoscopic cervical discectomy group. Postoperatively, the clinical outcomes of the 2 approaches were significantly improved, but the differences between the 2 approaches were not significant (P = 0.211 and P = 0.257, respectively). Four surgery-related complications were observed among all enrolled patients (complications in each group were 2; overall 4 of 84, 4.8%).

CONCLUSION

In our study, the clinical outcomes between the 2 approaches did not differ significantly. Nevertheless, posterior full-endoscopic cervical discectomy may be preferable when considering the volume of disc removal, length of hospital stay, and the postoperative radiographical changes. As an efficacious supplement to traditional open surgery, FECD is a reliable alternative treatment of CIVDH and its optimal approach remains open to discussion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

The Nijmegen decision tool for chronic low back pain. Development of a clinical decision tool for secondary or tertiary spine care specialists

BACKGROUND

In Western Europe, low back pain has the greatest burden of all diseases. When back pain persists, different medical specialists are involved and a lack of consensus exists among these specialists for medical decision-making in Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP).

OBJECTIVE

To develop a decision tool for secondary or tertiary spine care specialists to decide which patients with CLBP should be seen by a spine surgeon or by other non-surgical medical specialists.

METHODS

A Delphi study was performed to identify indicators predicting the outcome of interventions. In the preparatory stage evidence from international guidelines and literature were summarized. Eligible studies were reviews and longitudinal studies. Inclusion criteria: surgical or non-surgical interventions and persistence of complaints, CLBP-patients aged 18-65 years, reported baseline measures of predictive indicators, and one or more reported outcomes had to assess functional status, quality of life, pain intensity, employment status or a composite score. Subsequently, a three-round Delphi procedure, to reach consensus on candidate indicators, was performed among a multidisciplinary panel of 29 CLBP-professionals (>five years CLBP-experience). The pre-set threshold for general agreement was ≥70%. The final indicator set was used to develop a clinical decision tool.

RESULTS

A draft list with 53 candidate indicators (38 with conclusive evidence and 15 with inconclusive evidence) was included for the Delphi study. Consensus was reached to include 47 indicators. A first version of the decision tool was developed, consisting of a web-based screening questionnaire and a provisional decision algorithm.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first clinical decision tool based on current scientific evidence and formal multidisciplinary consensus that helps referring the patient for consultation to a spine surgeon or a non-surgical spine care specialist. We expect that this tool considerably helps in clinical decision-making spine care, thereby improving efficient use of scarce sources and the outcomes of spinal interventions.

Report of the National Institutes of Health task force on research standards for chronic low back pain

OBJECTIVES

Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed nonspecific and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. The purpose of this article is to disseminate the report of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) task force on research standards for cLBP.

METHODS

The NIH Pain Consortium charged a research task force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel developed a 3-stage process, each with a 2-day meeting.

RESULTS

The panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimal data set to describe research subjects (drawing heavily on the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved these recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals.

CONCLUSIONS

The RTF believes that these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of cLBP. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes. We expect the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document and undergo continual improvement.

Report of the NIH Task Force on Research Standards for Chronic Low Back Pain

Despite rapidly increasing intervention, functional disability due to chronic low back pain (cLBP) has increased in recent decades. We often cannot identify mechanisms to explain the major negative impact cLBP has on patients' lives. Such cLBP is often termed non-specific and may be due to multiple biologic and behavioral etiologies. Researchers use varied inclusion criteria, definitions, baseline assessments, and outcome measures, which impede comparisons and consensus. Therefore, NIH Pain Consortium charged a Research Task Force (RTF) to draft standards for research on cLBP. The resulting multidisciplinary panel recommended using 2 questions to define cLBP; classifying cLBP by its impact (defined by pain intensity, pain interference, and physical function); use of a minimum dataset to describe research participants (drawing heavily on the PROMIS methodology); reporting "responder analyses" in addition to mean outcome scores; and suggestions for future research and dissemination. The Pain Consortium has approved the recommendations, which investigators should incorporate into NIH grant proposals. The RTF believes that these recommendations will advance the field, help to resolve controversies, and facilitate future research addressing the genomic, neurologic, and other mechanistic substrates of chronic low back pain. We expect that the RTF recommendations will become a dynamic document and undergo continual improvement.

PERSPECTIVE

A task force was convened by the NIH Pain Consortium with the goal of developing research standards for chronic low back pain. The results included recommendations for definitions, a minimum dataset, reporting outcomes, and future research. Greater consistency in reporting should facilitate comparisons among studies and the development of phenotypes.

Lumbar spinal stenosis: who should be fused? An updated review

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is mostly caused by osteoarthritis (spondylosis). Clinically, the symptoms of patients with LSS can be categorized into two groups; regional (low back pain, stiffness, and so on) or radicular (spinal stenosis mainly presenting as neurogenic claudication). Both of these symptoms usually improve with appropriate conservative treatment, but in refractory cases, surgical intervention is occasionally indicated. In the patients who primarily complain of radiculopathy with an underlying biomechanically stable spine, a decompression surgery alone using a less invasive technique may be sufficient. Preoperatively, with the presence of indicators such as failed back surgery syndrome (revision surgery), degenerative instability, considerable essential deformity, symptomatic spondylolysis, refractory degenerative disc disease, and adjacent segment disease, lumbar fusion is probably recommended. Intraoperatively, in cases with extensive decompression associated with a wide disc space or insufficient bone stock, fusion is preferred. Instrumentation improves the fusion rate, but it is not necessarily associated with improved recovery rate and better functional outcome.

Diagnostic and therapeutic spinal interventions: Facet joint interventions

Axial spine pain is a common condition that is due to facet joint disease in some patients. Local anesthetic blocks of the medial branches of the dorsal rami of the spinal nerves that innervate facet joints are used to identify painful facet joints. Subsequent radiofrequency neurotomy of the medial branches serving symptomatic facet joints may provide prolonged albeit impermanent pain relief. The diagnostic blocks and radiofrequency treatments are best validated in the cervical spine. Neurologists should be aware that patients with axial spine pain who are referred to a pain clinic or pain management facility are likely to be considered for diagnostic and therapeutic interventions directed at facet joints and their sensory nerve supply.