scholarly journals An Updated Analysis of Utilization of Epidural Procedures in Managing Chronic Pain in the Medicare Population from 2000 to 2018

2020 ◽  
Vol 2;23 (4;2) ◽  
pp. 111-126
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
The United States ◽  
Interventional Techniques ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Medicare Population ◽  
Utilization Patterns ◽  
Caudal Epidural ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: With increasing costs of health care in the United States, attention is focused on expensive conditions. Musculoskeletal disorders with low back and neck pain account for the third highest amount of various disease categories. Minimally invasive interventional techniques for managing spinal pain, including epidural injections, have been considered to be growing rapidly. However, recent analyses of utilization of interventional techniques from 2000 to 2018 has shown a decline of 2.6% and a decline of 21% from 2009 to 2018 for epidural and adhesiolysis procedures. Objectives: The objectives of this analysis of epidural procedures from 2000 to 2018 are to provide an update on utilization of epidural injections in managing chronic pain in the fee-forservice (FFS) Medicare population, with a comparative analysis of 2000 to 2009 and 2009 to 2018. Study Design: Utilization patterns and variables of epidural injections in managing chronic spinal pain from 2000 to 2009 and from 2009 to 2018 in the FFS Medicare population in the United States. Methods: This analysis was performed by utilizing master data from CMS, physician/supplier procedure summary from 2000 to 2018. The analysis was performed by the assessment of utilization patterns using guidance from Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE). Results: Overall, epidural procedures declined at a rate of 20.7% per 100,000 Medicare enrollees in FFS Medicare in the United States from 2009 to 2018, with an annual decline of 2.5%. However, from 2000 to 2009, there was an increase of 89.2%, with an annual increase of 7.3%. This analysis showed a decline in all categories, with an annual decrease of 4.7% for lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections, 4.7% decline for cervical/thoracic transforaminal epidural injections, 1.1% decline for lumbar/sacral transforaminal epidural injections, and finally 0.4% decline for cervical/thoracic interlaminar epidural injections. Overall declines from 2009 to 2018 were highest for cervical and thoracic transforaminal injections with 35.1%, followed by lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections of 34.9%, followed by 9.4% for lumbar/sacral transforaminal epidurals, and 3.5% for cervical and thoracic interlaminar epidurals. Limitations: This analysis was limited by noninclusion of Medicare Advantage plans, which constitutes almost 30% of the Medicare population. In addition, utilization data for individual states continues to be sparse and may not be accurate or representative of the population. Conclusions: The declining utilization of epidural injections in all categories with an annual of 2.5% and overall decrease of 20.7% from 2009 to 2018 compared with annual increases of 7.3% and overall increase of 89.2% from 2000 to 2009 shows a slow decline of utilization of all epidural injections. Key words: Chronic spinal pain, interlaminar epidural injections, caudal epidural injections, transforaminal epidural injections, utilization patterns

scholarly journals Declining Utilization and Inflation-Adjusted Expenditures for Epidural Procedures in Chronic Spinal Pain in the Medicare Population

2020 ◽  
Vol 1;24 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Sample ◽  
Fee For Service ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Medicare Population ◽  
Adjusted Rate ◽  
Caudal Epidural ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

BACKGROUND: Despite epidurals being one of the most common interventional pain procedures for managing chronic spinal pain in the United States, expenditure analysis lacks assessment in correlation with utilization patterns. OBJECTIVES: This investigation was undertaken to assess expenditures for epidural procedures in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population from 2009 to 2018. STUDY DESIGN: The present study was designed to assess expenditures in all settings, for all providers in the FFS Medicare population from 2009 to 2018 in the United States. In this manuscript: • A patient was described as receiving epidural procedures throughout the year. • A visit was considered to include all regions treated during the visit. • An episode was considered as one treatment per region utilizing primary codes only. • Services or procedures were considered as all procedures including bilateral and multiple levels. A standard 5% national sample of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) physician outpatient billing claims data for those enrolled in the FFS Medicare program from 2009 to 2018 was utilized. All the expenditures were presented with allowed costs and adjusted to inflation to 2018 US dollars. RESULTS: Total expenditures were $723,981,594 in 2009, whereas expenditures of 2018 were $829,987,636, with an overall 14.6% increase, or an annual increase of 1.5%. However, the inflation-adjusted rate was $847,058,465 in 2009, compared to $829,987,636 in 2018, a reduction overall of 2% and an annual reduction of 0.2%. Inflation-adjusted per patient annual costs decreased from $988.93 in 2009 to $819.27 in 2018 with a decrease of 17.2% or an annual decline of 2.1%. In addition, inflation-adjusted costs per procedure decreased from $399.77 to $377.94, or 5.5% overall and 0.6% annually. Per procedure, episode, visit, and patient expenses were higher for transforaminal epidural procedures than lumbar interlaminar/caudal epidural procedures. Overall, costs of transforaminal epidurals increased 27.6% or 2.7% annually, whereas lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections cost were reduced 2.7%, or 0.3% annually. Inflation-adjusted costs for transforaminal epidurals increased 9.1% or 1.0% annually and declined 16.9 or 2.0% annually for lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural injections. LIMITATIONS: Expenditures for epidural procedures in chronic spinal pain were assessed only in the FFS Medicare population. This excluded over 30% of the Medicare population, which is enrolled in Medicare Advantage plans. CONCLUSIONS: After adjusting for inflation, there was a decrease of expenditures for epidural procedures of 2%, or 0.2% annually, from 2009 to 2018. However, prior to inflation, the increases were noted at 14.6% and 1.5%. Inflation-adjusted costs per patient, per visit, and per procedure also declined. The proportion of Medicare patients per 100,000 receiving epidural procedures decreased 9.1%, or 1.1% annually. However, assessment of individual procedures showed higher costs for transforaminal epidural procedures compared to lumbar interlaminar and caudal epidural procedures. KEY WORDS: Chronic spinal pain, epidural procedures, caudal epidural, lumbar interlaminar epidural, cervical interlaminar epidural, thoracic interlaminar epidural, lumbar transforaminal epidural procedures, Medicare expenditures

scholarly journals Update of Utilization Patterns of Facet Joint Interventions in Managing Spinal Pain from 2000 to 2018 in the US Fee-for-Service Medicare Population

2020 ◽  
Vol 2;23 (4;2) ◽  
pp. E133-E149
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
The United States ◽  
Annual Rate ◽  
Fee For Service ◽  
Interventional Techniques ◽  
Medicare Population ◽  
Utilization Patterns ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Background: Interventional techniques for managing spinal pain, from conservative modalities to surgical interventions, are thought to have been growing rapidly. Interventional techniques take center stage in managing chronic spinal pain. Specifically, facet joint interventions experienced explosive growth rates from 2000 to 2009, with a reversal of these growth patterns and in some settings, a trend of decline after 2009. Objectives: The objectives of this assessment of utilization patterns include providing an update of facet joint interventions in managing chronic spinal pain in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population of the United States from 2000 to 2018. Study Design: The study was designed to assess utilization patterns and variables of facet joint interventions in managing chronic spinal pain from 2000 to 2018 in the FFS Medicare population in the United States. Methods: Data for the analysis were obtained from the master database from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) physician/supplier procedure summary from 2000 to 2018. Results: Facet joint interventions increased 1.9% annually and 18.8% total from 2009 to 2018 per 100,000 FFS Medicare population compared with an annual increase of 17% and overall increase of 309.9% from 2000 to 2009. Lumbosacral facet joint nerve block sessions or visits decreased at an annual rate of 0.2% from 2009 to 2018, with an increase of 15.2% from 2000 to 2009. In contrast, lumbosacral facet joint neurolysis sessions increased at an annual rate of 7.4% from 2009 to 2018, and the utilization rate also increased at an annual rate of 23.0% from 2000 to 2009. The proportion of lumbar facet joint blocks sessions to lumbosacral facet joint neurolysis sessions changed from 6.7 in 2000 to 1.9 in 2018. Cervical and thoracic facet joint injections increased at an annual rate of 0.5% compared with cervicothoracic facet neurolysis sessions of 8.7% from 2009 to 2018. Cervical facet joint injections increased to 4.9% from 2009 to 2018 compared with neurolysis procedures of 112%. The proportion of cervical facet joint injection sessions to neurolysis sessions changed from 8.9 in 2000 to 2.4 in 2018. Limitations: This analysis is limited by inclusion of only the FFS Medicare population, without adding utilization patterns of Medicare Advantage plans, which constitutes almost 30% of the Medicare population. The utilization data for individual states also continues to be sparse and may not be accurate. Conclusions: Utilization patterns of facet joint interventions increased 1.9% per 100,000 Medicare population from 2009 to 2018. This results from an annual decline of - 0.2% lumbar facet joint injection sessions but with an increase of facet joint radiofrequency sessions of 7.4%. Key words: Interventional techniques, facet joint interventions, facet joint nerve blocks, facet joint neurolysis

scholarly journals Update on Reversal and Decline of Growth of Utilization of Interventional Techniques In Managing Chronic Pain in the Medicare Population from 2000 to 2018

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (22;6) ◽  
pp. 521-536 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Interventional Techniques ◽  
Medicare Population ◽  
Utilization Patterns ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions ◽  
Annual Decline

Background: The cost of US health care continues to increase, with treatments related to low back and neck pain and other musculoskeletal disorders accounting for the third highest amount of various disease categories. Interventional techniques for managing pain apart from conservative modalities and surgical interventions, have generally been thought to be growing rapidly. However, a recent analysis of utilization of interventional techniques from 2000 to 2016 has shown a modest decline from 2009 to 2016, compared to 2000 to 2009. Objectives: The objectives of this analysis include providing an update on utilization of interventional techniques in managing chronic pain in the Medicare population from 2009 to 2018 in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population of the United States. Study Design: Utilization patterns and variables of interventional techniques in managing chronic pain were assessed from 2000 to 2009 and from 2009 to 2018 in the FFS Medicare population of the United States. Methods: The data for the analysis was obtained from the master database from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) physician/supplier procedure summary from 2000 to 2018. Results: The analysis of data showed that there was a decline in utilization of interventional techniques from 2009 to 2018 of 6.7%, with an annual decline of 0.8% per 100,000 FFS Medicare population, despite an increase of 0.7% per year of population growth (3.2% of those 65 years or older) and a 3% annual increase in Medicare participation from 2009 to 2018. Medicare data from 2000 to 2009 showed an increase of 11.8% per year per 100,000 individuals of the Medicare population. The 2009 to 2018 data also showed a 2.6% annual decrease in the rate of utilization of epidural and adhesiolysis procedures per 100,000 population of FFS Medicare, and a 1% decrease for disc procedures and other types of nerve blocks, while there was an increase of 0.9% annually for facet joint interventions and sacroiliac joint blocks. Limitations: Limitations of this analysis include: only the Medicare population was utilized, and among the Medicare population, only the FFS population was evaluated; utilization patterns in Medicare Advantage Plans, which constitutes almost 30% of the population were not considered. Further, the utilization data for individual states was sparse and may not be accurate. Conclusion: The decline in utilization of interventional techniques continued from 2009 to 2018 with 6.7% per 100,000 Medicare population, with an annual decline of 0.8%, despite an increase in the population rate and Medicare enrollees of 0.7% and 3% annually. Key words: Interventional pain management, chronic spinal pain, interventional techniques, epidural injections, adhesiolysis, facet joint interventions, sacroiliac joint injections, disc procedures, other types of nerve blocks

scholarly journals A Prospective Evaluation of Complications of 10,000 Fluoroscopically Directed Epidural Injections

2012 ◽  
Vol 2;15 (2;3) ◽  
pp. 131-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Dural Puncture ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cervical Region ◽  
Interventional Techniques ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Large Patient ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Caudal Epidural

Background: Among the multiple modalities of treatments available in managing chronic spinal pain, including surgery and multiple interventional techniques, epidural injections by various routes, such as interlaminar epidural injections, caudal epidural injections, transforaminal epidural injections, and percutaneous adhesiolysis are common. Even though the complications of fluoroscopically directed epidural injections are fewer than blind epidural injections, and have better effectiveness, multiple complications have been reported in scattered case reports, with only minor complications in randomized or non-randomized studies and systematic reviews. Thus, prospective studies with large patient series are essential to determine the types and incidences of complications. Study Design: A prospective, non-randomized study of patients undergoing interventional techniques from May 2008 to December 2009. Setting: A private interventional pain management practice, a specialty referral center in the United States. Objectives: To assess the complication rate of fluoroscopically directed epidural injections. Methods: This study was carried out over a period of 20 months and included over 10,000 procedures: 39% caudal epidurals, 23% cervical interlaminar epidurals, 14% lumbar interlaminar epidurals, 13% lumbar transforaminal epidurals, 8% percutaneous adhesiolysis, and 3% thoracic interlaminar epidural procedures. All of the interventions were performed under fluoroscopic guidance in an ambulatory surgery center by one of 3 physicians. The complications encountered during the procedure and postoperatively were prospectively evaluated. Outcomes Assessment: Measurable outcomes employed were intravascular entry of the needle, profuse bleeding, local hematoma, bruising, dural puncture and headache, nerve root or spinal cord irritation with resultant injury, infectious complications, vasovagal reactions, and facial flushing. Results: Intravascular entry was higher for adhesiolysis (11.6%) and lumbar transforaminal (7.9%) procedures compared to other epidurals which ranged from 0.5% for lumbar, 3.1% for caudal, 4% for thoracic, and 4.1% for cervical epidurals. Dural puncture was observed in a total of 0.5% of the procedures with 1% in the cervical region, 1.3% in the thoracic region, 0.8% with lumbar interlaminar epidurals, and 1.8% with adhesiolysis. Limitations: Limitations of this study include a single-center study even though it included a large number of patients. Conclusion: This study illustrates that major complications are rare and minor side effects are common. Key words: Spinal pain, epidural injections, caudal epidural, interlaminar epidural, transforaminal epidural, percutaneous adhesiolysis, complications, and steroids.

Reversal of Growth of Utilization of Interventional Techniques in Managing Chronic Pain in Medicare Population Post Affordable Care Act

2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (20;7) ◽  
pp. 551-567 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti,
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Sacroiliac Joint ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
The United States ◽  
Nerve Blocks ◽  
Annual Increase ◽  
Interventional Techniques ◽  
Medicare Population ◽  
Utilization Patterns ◽  
Facet Joint Interventions

Background: Over the past 2 decades, the increase in the utilization of interventional techniques has been a cause for concern. Despite multiple regulations to reduce utilization of interventional techniques, growth patterns continued through 2009. A declining trend was observed in a previous evaluation; however, a comparative analysis of utilization patterns of interventional techniques has not been performed showing utilization before and after the enactment of the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Objectives: Our aim is to assess patterns of utilization and variables of interventional techniques in chronic pain management in the fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population, with a comparative analysis of pre- and post-ACA. Study Design: Utilization patterns and variables of interventional techniques were assessed from 2000 to 2009 and from 2009 to 2016 in the FFS Medicare population of the United States in managing chronic pain. Methods: The master data from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) physician/ supplier procedure summary from 2000 to 2016 was utilized to assess overall utilization and comparative utilization at various time periods. Results: The analysis of Medicare data from 2000 to 2016 showed an overall decrease in utilization of interventional techniques 0.6% per year from 2009 to 2016, whereas from 2000 to 2009, there was an increase of 11.8% per year per 100,000 individuals of the Medicare population. In addition, the United States experienced an increase of 0.7% per year of population growth, 3.2% of those 65 years or older and a 3% annual increase in Medicare participation from 2009 to 2016. Further analysis also showed a 1.7% annual decrease in the rate of utilization of epidural and adhesiolysis procedures per 100,000 individuals of the Medicare population, with a 2.2% decrease for disc procedures and other types of nerve blocks, whereas there was an increase of 0.8% annually for facet joint interventions and sacroiliac joint blocks from 2009 to 2016. Epidural and adhesiolysis procedures showed an 8.9% annual increase, facet joint interventions and sacroiliac joint blocks showed a 17.6% increase, and disc procedures and other types of nerve blocks showed a 7.2% increase annually per 100,000 individuals of the Medicare population from 2000 to 2009. Limitations: The limitations of this assessment include lack of analysis of individual procedures. Additional limitations include lack of inclusion of patients from Medicare Advantage plans and lack of complete and accurate data for statewide utilization. Conclusion: From 2009 to 2016, interventional techniques decreased at an annual rate of 0.6% with an overall decrease of 3.9%, compared to an overall increase of 173.6% from 2000 to 2009 with an annual increase of 11.8%. An additional analysis of data with individual procedures is essential to gain further insights into utilization patterns. Key words: Interventional pain management, chronic spinal pain, interventional techniques, epidural injections, adhesiolysis, facet joint interventions, sacroiliac joint injections, disc procedures, other types of nerve blocks

scholarly journals Assessment of the Growth of Epidural Injections in the Medicare Population from 2000 to 2011

2013 ◽  
Vol 4;16 (4;7) ◽  
pp. E349-E364
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Present Report ◽  
The United States ◽  
Medicare Beneficiaries ◽  
Physical Medicine ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation ◽  
Medicare Population ◽  
Caudal Epidural

Background: Among the many diagnostic and therapeutic interventions available for the management of chronic pain, epidural steroid injections are one of the most commonly used modalities. The explosive growth of this technique is relevant in light of the high cost of health care in the United States and abroad, the previous literature assessing the effectiveness of epidural injections has been sparse with highly variable outcomes based on technique, outcome measures, patient selection, and methodology. However, the recent assessment of fluoroscopically directed epidural injections has shown improved evidence with proper inclusion criteria, methodology, and outcome measures. The exponential growth of epidural injections is illustrated in multiple reports. The present report is an update of the analysis of the growth of epidural injections in the Medicare population from 2000 to 2011 in the United States. Study Design: Analysis of utilization patterns of epidural procedures in the Medicare population in the United States from 2000 to 2011. Objectives: The primary purpose of this assessment was to evaluate the use of all types of epidural injections (i.e., caudal, interlaminar, and transforaminal in the lumbar, cervical, and thoracic regions) with an assessment of specialty and regional characteristics. Methods: This assessment was performed utilizing the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician/Supplier Procedure Summary (PSPS) Master data from 2000 to 2011. Results: Epidural injections in Medicare beneficiaries increased significantly from 2000 to 2011. Overall, epidural injections increased 130% per 100,000 Medicare beneficiaries with an annual increase of 7.5%. The increases per 100,000 Medicare recipients were 123% for cervical/ thoracic interlaminar epidural injections; 25% for lumbar/sacral interlaminar, or caudal epidural injections; 142% for cervical/thoracic transforaminal epidural injections; and 665% for lumbar/ sacral transforaminal epidural injections. The use of epidurals increased 224% in the radiologic specialties (interventional radiology and diagnostic radiology) and 145% in psychiatric settings, whereas and physical medicine and rehabilitation physicians’ use of epidurals increased 520%. Limitations: Study limitations include lack of inclusion of Medicare Advantage patients. In addition, the statewide data is based on claims which may include the contiguous or other states. Conclusions: Epidural injections in Medicare recipients increased significantly. The growth was significant for some specialties (radiology, physical medicine and rehabilitation, and psychiatry) and for certain procedures (lumbosacral transforaminal epidural injections). Key words: Spinal pain, interventional pain management, epidural injections, caudal epidural, lumbar epidural, cervical epidural, cervical transforaminal, lumbar transforaminal

Chronic spinal pain and physical–mental comorbidity in the United States: results from the national comorbidity survey replication

Pain ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 113 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Von Korff ◽  
Paul Crane ◽  
Michael Lane ◽  
Diana L. Miglioretti ◽  
Greg Simon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Comorbidity Survey Replication ◽  
National Comorbidity Survey ◽  
Mental Comorbidity ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

scholarly journals Declining Utilization Patterns of Percutaneous Adhesiolysis Procedures in the Fee-For-Service (FFS) Medicare Population

2020 ◽  
Vol 1;24 (1;1) ◽  
pp. 17-29
Keyword(s):  
Lower Extremity ◽  
The United States ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Fee For Service ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Medicare Population ◽  
Post Surgery ◽  
Lower Extremity Pain ◽  
Utilization Patterns ◽  
Annual Decline

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis is a minimally invasive therapeutic modality used in the treatment of patients with chronic low back and lower extremity pain, often recalcitrant to other modalities including epidural injections and surgical interventions. While the initial utilization since its introduction and development of appropriate Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes increased up until 2008, but since 2009, there has been a significant decline in utilization of these procedures in the Medicare population. These procedures declined by 53.2% at an annual rate of 10.3% from 2009 to 2016. A recent update analysis on the reversal and decline of growth of utilization of interventional techniques in managing chronic pain in the Medicare population from 2009 to 2018 revealed an even further decline of adhesiolysis procedures. STUDY DESIGN: An analysis of the utilization patterns of percutaneous adhesiolysis procedures in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain in the Medicare population from 2000 to 2018, with comparative analysis from 2000 to 2009 and 2009 to 2018. OBJECTIVE: To assess the utilization patterns of percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing chronic low back pain in the Medicare population. METHODS: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Physician Supplier Procedure Summary Master of Fee-For-Service (FFS) Data from 2000 to 2018 was used. In this analysis, various variables were assessed in reference to usage patterns of percutaneous adhesiolysis procedures with analysis of growth or declining utilization patterns. We also assessed specialty-based utilization, as well as statewide utilization. RESULTS: The decline of percutaneous adhesiolysis procedures began in 2009 and has continued since then. From 2009 to 2018, the overall decline was 69.2%, with an annual decline of 12.3% compared to an overall 62.6% increase from 2000 to 2009, with an annual increase of 5.6%. Compared to multiple other interventions, including epidural injections and facet joint interventions, percutaneous adhesiolysis has declined at a rapid rate. CONCLUSIONS: This assessment in the FFS Medicare population in the United States shows an irreversible decline of utilization of percutaneous adhesiolysis procedures, which has been gradually deteriorating with a 69.2% decline from 2009 to 2018 with an annual decline of 12.3% during that same time period. KEY WORDS: Epidural injections, percutaneous adhesiolysis, post-surgery syndrome, spinal stenosis, lumbar disc herniation

scholarly journals An Algorithmic Approach for Clinical Management of Chronic Spinal Pain

2009 ◽  
Vol 4;12 (4;7) ◽  
pp. E225-E264
Author(s):  
Laxmaiah Manchikanti
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Disc Herniation ◽  
Facet Joint ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Algorithmic Approach ◽  
Interventional Techniques ◽  
Epidural Injections ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain

Interventional pain management, and the interventional techniques which are an integral part of that specialty, are subject to widely varying definitions and practices. How interventional techniques are applied by various specialties is highly variable, even for the most common procedures and conditions. At the same time, many payors, publications, and guidelines are showing increasing interest in the performance and costs of interventional techniques. There is a lack of consensus among interventional pain management specialists with regards to how to diagnose and manage spinal pain and the type and frequency of spinal interventional techniques which should be utilized to treat spinal pain. Therefore, an algorithmic approach is proposed, providing a stepby-step procedure for managing chronic spinal pain patients based upon evidence-based guidelines. The algorithmic approach is developed based on the best available evidence regarding the epidemiology of various identifiable sources of chronic spinal pain. Such an approach to spinal pain includes an appropriate history, examination, and medical decision making in the management of low back pain, neck pain and thoracic pain. This algorithm also provides diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to clinical management utilizing case examples of cervical, lumbar, and thoracic spinal pain. An algorithm for investigating chronic low back pain without disc herniation commences with a clinical question, examination and imaging findings. If there is evidence of radiculitis, spinal stenosis, or other demonstrable causes resulting in radiculitis, one may proceed with diagnostic or therapeutic epidural injections. In the algorithmic approach, facet joints are entertained first in the algorithm because of their commonality as a source of chronic low back pain followed by sacroiliac joint blocks if indicated and provocation discography as the last step. Based on the literature, in the United States, in patients without disc herniation, lumbar facet joints account for 30% of the cases of chronic low back pain, sacroiliac joints account for less than 10% of these cases, and discogenic pain accounts for 25% of the patients. The management algorithm for lumbar spinal pain includes interventions for somatic pain and radicular pain with either facet joint interventions, sacroiliac joint interventions, or intradiscal therapy. For radicular pain, epidural injections, percutaneous adhesiolysis, percutaneous disc decompression, or spinal endoscopic adhesiolysis may be performed. For non-responsive, recalcitrant, neuropathic pain, implantable therapy may be entertained. In managing pain of cervical origin, if there is evidence of radiculitis, spinal stenosis, post-surgery syndrome, or other demonstrable causes resulting in radiculitis, an interventionalist may proceed with therapeutic epidural injections. An algorithmic approach for chronic neck pain without disc herniation or radiculitis commences with clinical question, physical and imaging findings, followed by diagnostic facet joint injections. Cervical provocation discography is rarely performed. Based on the literature available in the United States, cervical facet joints account for 40% to 50% of cases of chronic neck pain without disc herniation, while discogenic pain accounts for approximately 20% of the patients. The management algorithm includes either facet joint interventions or epidural injections with surgical referral for disc-related pain and rarely implantable therapy. In managing thoracic pain, a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithmic approach includes either facet joint interventions or epidural injections. Key words: Algorithmic approach, chronic pain, chronic spinal pain, diagnostic interventional techniques, therapeutic interventional techniques, comprehensive evaluation, documentation, medical decision making.

scholarly journals Health Care Costs and Opioid Use Associated With High-impact Chronic Spinal Pain in the United States

Spine ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (16) ◽  
pp. 1154-1161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia M. Herman ◽  
Nicholas Broten ◽  
Tara A. Lavelle ◽  
Melony E. Sorbero ◽  
Ian D. Coulter
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Care Costs ◽  
Spinal Pain ◽  
The United States ◽  
High Impact ◽  
Opioid Use ◽  
Care Costs ◽  
Chronic Spinal Pain
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document