Patient perceptions of the role of psychosocial factors in non-specific chronic spinal pain: A systematic review and meta-synthesis

2016 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. e65
Author(s):  
M. O'Keeffe ◽  
J. Ryan ◽  
I. Leahy ◽  
S. Bunzli ◽  
P. O'Sullivan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Psychosocial Factors ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Patient Perceptions ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

scholarly journals Systematic Review of Discography as a Diagnostic Test for Spinal Pain: An Update

2007 ◽  
Vol 1;10 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 147-164
Author(s):  
Ricardo M. Buenaventura
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Intervertebral Disc ◽  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Evaluation Tool ◽  
Discogenic Pain ◽  
Imaging Tool ◽  
Pain Generator ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: The intervertebral disc has been implicated as an etiology of chronic spine pain based on clinical, basic science, and epidemiological research. There is currently no way to determine with absolute certainty whether or not the disc is a spinal pain generator. At our current level of understanding, discography is thought of as the best tool to evaluate disc-related pain. Study Design: A systematic review. Objective: To systematically assess the diagnostic accuracy of discography with respect to chronic spinal pain. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of discography with respect to chronic spinal pain. Study inclusion/exclusion criteria were based on the modern practice of discography. Selected studies were then subjected to two rating instruments for diagnostic accuracy studies (AHRQ and QUADAS). Specific data were then culled from these studies and tabulated. Evidence was then classified into five levels: conclusive, strong, moderate, limited, or indeterminate. Results: Evidence is strong for the diagnostic accuracy of discography as an imaging tool. Evidence is also strong for the ability of discography to evoke pain. There is strong evidence supporting the role of discography in identifying that subset of patients with lumbar discogenic pain. There is moderate evidence supporting the role of discography in identifying a subset of patients with cervical discogenic pain. There is limited evidence supporting the role of discography in identifying a subset of patients with thoracic discogenic pain. Conclusion: Discography is a useful imaging and pain evaluation tool in identifying a subset of patients with chronic spinal pain secondary to intervertebral disc disorders. Key words: Spinal pain, intervertebral disc, discography, pain generator, false-positives, diagnostic accuracy

scholarly journals Associates of Insomnia in People with Chronic Spinal Pain: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (14) ◽  
pp. 3175
Author(s):  
Thomas Bilterys ◽  
Carolie Siffain ◽  
Ina De Maeyer ◽  
Eveline Van Looveren ◽  
Olivier Mairesse ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Chronic Low Back Pain ◽  
Associated Factors ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Quality Evidence ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Insomnia is a major problem in the chronic spinal pain (CSP) population and has a negative impact on health and well-being. While insomnia is commonly reported, underlying mechanisms explaining the relation between sleep and pain are still not fully understood. Additionally, no reviews regarding the prevention of insomnia and/or associated factors in people with CSP are currently available. To gain a better understanding of the occurrence of insomnia and associated factors in this population, we conducted a systematic review of the literature exploring associates for insomnia in people with CSP in PubMed, Web of Science and Embase. Three independent reviewers extracted the data and performed the quality assessment. A meta-analysis was conducted for every potential associate presented in at least two studies. A total of 13 studies were found eligible, which together identified 25 different potential associates of insomnia in 24,817 people with CSP. Twelve studies had a cross-sectional design. Moderate-quality evidence showed a significantly higher rate for insomnia when one of the following factors was present: high pain intensity, anxiety and depression. Low-quality evidence showed increased odds for insomnia when one of the following factors was present: female sex, performing no professional activities and physical/musculoskeletal comorbidities. Higher healthcare use was also significantly related to the presence of insomnia. One study showed a strong association between high levels of pain catastrophizing and insomnia in people with chronic neck pain. Last, reduced odds for insomnia were found in physically active people with chronic low back pain compared to inactive people with chronic low back pain. This review provides an overview of the available literature regarding potential associates of insomnia in people with CSP. Several significant associates of insomnia were identified. These findings can be helpful to gain a better understanding of the characteristics and potential origin of insomnia in people witch CSP, to identify people with CSP who are (less) likely to have insomnia and to determine directions of future research in this area.

scholarly journals Microscopic changes in the spinal extensor musculature in patients experiencing chronic spinal pain: protocol for a systematic review

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e042729
Author(s):  
Shilpa Purushotham ◽  
Robert Stanley Stephenson ◽  
Andy Sanderson ◽  
Deborah Falla
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Muscle Fibre Types ◽  
Lumbar Region ◽  
Extensor Muscles ◽  
Global Burden Of Diseases ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

IntroductionChronic spinal pain (CSP) is the most common musculoskeletal disorder and is a leading cause of disability as per the Global Burden of Diseases. Previous reviews of microscopic changes in the spinal extensor muscles of people with CSP have focused on the lumbar region only and the results have been inconclusive. Therefore, in this protocol, we aim to assess microscopic changes in the extensor muscles of all spinal regions, investigating regionally specific changes in muscle fibre types of the spinal extensor muscles in patients with non-specific CSP.Methods/analysisThis protocol was designed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) guidelines. Searches will use the following databases: MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, CINAHL Plus and Web of Science along with relevant grey literature searches. Two reviewers will conduct the searches, perform data extraction, apply inclusion criteria and conduct risk of bias assessment using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data will be synthesised and analysed independently. If there is sufficient homogeneity, then meta-analysis will be conducted by the reviewers jointly. If not, meta-synthesis or narrative reporting will be performed. The quality of the evidence will be assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines.Ethics and disseminationThe results of this study will be submitted for publication to a peer-reviewed journal and will be presented at conferences. Ethical approval for this systematic review was not required due to no patient data being collated.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020198087.

scholarly journals A Systematic Review and Best Evidence Synthesis of Effectiveness of Therapeutic Facet Joint Interventions in Managing Chronic Spinal Pain

2015 ◽  
Vol 18;4 (4;18) ◽  
pp. E535-E582 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Radiofrequency Neurotomy ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Interventional Pain Management ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: The therapeutic spinal facet joint interventions generally used for the treatment of axial spinal pain of facet joint origin are intraarticular facet joint injections, facet joint nerve blocks, and radiofrequency neurotomy. Despite interventional procedures being common as treatment strategies for facet joint pathology, there is a paucity of literature investigating these therapeutic approaches. Systematic reviews assessing the effectiveness of various therapeutic facet joint interventions have shown there to be variable evidence based on the region and the modality of treatment utilized. Overall, the evidence ranges from limited to moderate. Objective: To evaluate and update the clinical utility of therapeutic lumbar, cervical, and thoracic facet joint interventions in managing chronic spinal pain. Study Design: A systematic review of therapeutic lumbar, cervical, and thoracic facet joint interventions for the treatment of chronic spinal pain. Methods: The available literature on lumbar, cervical, and thoracic facet joint interventions in managing chronic spinal pain was reviewed. The quality assessment criteria utilized were the Cochrane Musculoskeletal Review Group criteria and Interventional Pain Management Techniques – Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM – QRB) for randomized trials and Interventional Pain Management Techniques – Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment for Nonrandomized Studies (IPM – QRBNR) for observational studies. The level of evidence was classified at 5 levels from Level I to Level V. Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches on PubMed and EMBASE from 1966 through March 2015, and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measure was pain relief (short-term relief = up to 6 months and long-term > 6 months). Secondary outcome measures were improvement in functional status, psychological status, return to work, and reduction in opioid intake consumption. Results: A total of 21 randomized controlled trials meeting appropriate inclusion criteria were assessed in this evaluation. A total of 5 observational studies were assessed. In the lumbar spine, for long-term effectiveness, there is Level II evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy and lumbar facet joint nerve blocks, whereas the evidence is Level III for lumbosacral intraarticular injections. In the cervical spine, for long-term improvement, there is Level II evidence for cervical radiofrequency neurotomy and cervical facet joint nerve blocks, and Level IV evidence for cervical intraarticular injections. In the thoracic spine there is Level II evidence for thoracic facet joint nerve blocks and Level IV evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy for long-term improvement. Limitations: The limitations of this systematic review include an overall paucity of high quality studies and more specifically the lack of investigations related to thoracic facet joint injections. Conclusion: Based on the present assessment for the management of spinal facet joint pain, the evidence for long-term improvement is Level II for lumbar and cervical radiofrequency neurotomy, and therapeutic facet joint nerve blocks in the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spine; Level III for lumbar intraarticular injections; and Level IV for cervical intraarticular injections and thoracic radiofrequency neurotomy. Key Words: Spinal pain, chronic low back pain, chronic neck pain, chronic thoracic pain, intraarticular facet joint blocks, facet joint nerve blocks, conventional radiofrequency neurotomy, pulsed radiofrequency neurolysis

scholarly journals Efficacy of Epidural Injections in Managing Chronic Spinal Pain: A Best Evidence Synthesis

2015 ◽  
Vol 6;18 (6;11) ◽  
pp. E939-E1004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan David Kaye
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Level Ii ◽  
Interlaminar Approach ◽  
Best Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: Epidural injections have been used since 1901 in managing low back pain and sciatica. Spinal pain, disability, health, and economic impact continue to increase, despite numerous modalities of interventions available in managing chronic spinal pain. Thus far, systematic reviews performed to assess the efficacy of epidural injections in managing chronic spinal pain have yielded conflicting results. Objective: To evaluate and update the clinical utility of the efficacy of epidural injections in managing chronic spinal pain. Study Design: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials of epidural injections in managing chronic spinal pain. Methods: In this systematic review, randomized trials with a placebo control or an active-control design were included. The outcome measures were pain relief and functional status improvement. The quality of each individual article was assessed by Cochrane review criteria, as well as the Interventional Pain Management Techniques - Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM-QRB). Best evidence synthesis was conducted based on the qualitative level of evidence (Level I to V). Data sources included relevant literature identified through searches of PubMed for a period starting in 1966 through August 2015; Cochrane reviews; and manual searches of the bibliographies of known primary and review articles. Results: A total of 52 trials met inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis was not feasible. The evidence in managing lumbar disc herniation or radiculitis is Level II for long-term improvement either with caudal, interlaminar, or transforaminal epidural injections with no significant difference among the approaches. The evidence is Level II for long-term management of cervical disc herniation with interlaminar epidural injections. The evidence is Level II to III in managing thoracic disc herniation with an interlaminar approach. The evidence is Level II for caudal and lumbar interlaminar epidural injections with Level III evidence for lumbar transforaminal epidural injections for lumbar spinal stenosis. The evidence is Level II for cervical spinal stenosis management with an interlaminar approach The evidence is Level II for axial or discogenic pain without facet arthropathy or disc herniation treated with caudal or lumbar interlaminar injections in the lumbar region; whereas it is Level II in the cervical region treated with cervical interlaminar epidural injections. The evidence for post lumbar surgery syndrome is Level II with caudal epidural injections and for post cervical surgery syndrome it is Level II with cervical interlaminar epidural injections. Limitations: Even though this is a large systematic review with inclusion of a large number of randomized controlled trials, the paucity of high quality randomized trials literature continues to confound the evidence. Conclusion: This systematic review, with an assessment of the quality of manuscripts and outcome parameters, shows the efficacy of epidural injections in managing a multitude of chronic spinal conditions. Key words: Chronic pain, spinal pain, epidural injections, local anesthetic, steroids, interlaminar epidural injections, caudal epidural injections, transforaminal epidural injections

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document