Search

Objective To determine if intra-articular (IA) injection of corticosteroids is effective in reducing the need for radiofrequency ablation (RFA) in those with dual comparative medial branch block (MBB)–confirmed lumbar z-joint pain. Design This was a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled study. Setting Two academic medical centers. Subjects Fifty-six consecutive subjects who had ≥80% pain relief during an initial screening MBB were recruited. Methods Patients received a second confirmatory MBB and concurrent IA injection of either corticosteroid or saline per randomization. Twenty-nine of 56 received intra-articular corticosteroid (triamcinolone 20 mg), of whom 24 also had a positive confirmatory MBB per Spine Interventional Society guidelines, with ≥80% pain relief from both MBBs. Twenty-seven of 56 received IA saline into the z-joint during the confirmatory MBB, of whom 22 also had a positive confirmatory MBB. The primary outcome measure was the categorical need for RFA due to insufficient pain relief with intra-articular injection, and the secondary outcome was time to RFA. Results There was no statistically significant difference in the need for an RFA between the groups (16/24 steroid, 67%, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 47–82%) vs 15/22 saline (68%, 95% CI = 47–84%, P  = 1.00). The average time to RFA was also not different, at 6.00 weeks for steroids vs 6.55 weeks for saline (P  = 0.82). Conclusions Intra-articular corticosteroids were not effective in reducing the need for or the time to a radiofrequency ablation of the medial branches in those with dual MBB–confirmed lumbar z-joint pain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To confirm that the simplified insole does not affect the gait speed and to identify objective sensor-based gait parameters that correlate strongly with existing clinical gait assessment scales. Methods: Ten participants with gait impairment due to hemiplegic stroke were enrolled in this study. Pairs of insoles with four pressure sensors on each side were manufactured and placed in each shoe. Data were extracted during the 10-Meter Walk Test. Several sensor-derived parameters (for example stance time, heel_on-to-toe_peak time, and toe_peak pressure) were calculated and correlated with gait speed and lower extremity Fugl-Meyer (F-M) score. Results: The insole pressure sensor did not affect gait, as indicated by a strong correlation (β=0.988) and high agreement (ICC=0.924) between the gait speeds with and without the insole. The parameters that correlated most strongly with highest β coefficients against the clinical measures were stance time of the non-hemiplegic leg (β=-0.87 with F-M and β=- 0.95 with gait speed) and heel_on-to-toe_peak time of the non-hemiplegic leg (β=-0.86 with F-M and -0.94 with gait speed). Conclusion: Stance time of the non-hemiparetic leg correlates most strongly with clinical measures and can be assessed using a non-obtrusive insole pressure sensor that does not affect gait function. These results suggest that an insole pressure sensor, which is applicable in a home environment, may be useful as a clinical endpoint in post-stroke gait therapy trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. The challenge of obtaining medical imaging in individuals with higher body mass index (BMI) is described, but there is minimal data regarding the relationship between BMI and fluoroscopy time during cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injection (CIESI).Objective. To determine the relationship between BMI and fluoroscopy time during CIESI. Methods. Retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent fluoroscopically guided CIESI between January 2014 and February 2015 at an academic pain medicine center. Fluoroscopy time data were collected. Comparisons based on analysis of variance were made between patients with normal (<25.0 kg/m2), overweight (25.0–29.9 kg/m2), and obese (≥30.0 kg/m2) BMI. Results. Of 399 procedure encounters, 366 had documented BMI and fluoroscopy time data and were included for analysis. Mean age (± SD) in this cohort was 53 ± 13 years, including 189 females (52%) and 205 first-time injections. Mean fluoroscopy time for all injections was 18 ± 10 seconds. Separated by categorical BMI class, the mean fluoroscopy time was 18 ± 9 seconds for normal weight patients, 17 ± 10 seconds for overweight patients, and 20 ± 11 seconds for obese patients, respectively. Post hoc analysis showed that fluoroscopy time was significantly longer only in obese compared with overweight patients (P = 0.02). Trainee involvement and first-time vs repeat injection did not significantly alter fluoroscopy time (P = 0.17 and P = 0.12, respectively).Conclusions. The findings of this study indicate that BMI does not appear to have a clinically significant impact on fluoroscopy time during cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injection procedures. Future study is needed to directly quantify radiation exposure in patients and practitioners, as well as the associated health risk. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Research suggests that people with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) would benefit from increased physical activity. Yet, to date, we do not have disease-specific activity guidelines for LSS, and the nature of free-living physical activity (performance) in LSS remains unknown. LSS care providers could endorse the 2008 United States Physical Activity Guidelines; however, we do not know if this is realistic. The goal of the present study was to determine the proportion of individuals with LSS meeting the 2008 Guidelines. A secondary goal was to better understand the nature of physical performance in this population.Study Design: Retrospective study.Patient Sample: People from the Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Accelerometry Database, all of whom have both radiographic and clinical LSS and are seeking various treatments for their symptoms.Outcome Measures: Seven-day accelerometry (functional outcome) and demographics (self-reported).Methods: For the present study, we analyzed only baseline data that were obtained before any new treatments. Patients with at least 4 valid days of baseline accelerometry data were included. We determined the proportion of individuals with LSS meeting the 2008 US Physical Activity Guidelines of at least 150 minutes of moderate-vigorous (MV) physical activity per week in bouts of 10 minutes or more. We also used the novel Physical Performance analysis designed by our group to determine time spent in varying intensities of activity. There are no conflicts of interest to disclose.Results: We analyzed data from 75 individuals with a mean age of 68 (SD 9), 37% of whom were male. Three people (4%) were considered Meeting Guidelines (at least 150 MV minutes/week), and 56 (75%) were considered Inactive with not even 1 MV minute/week. With the 10-minute bout requirement removed, 10 of 75 (13%) achieved the 150-minute threshold. The average time spent in sedentary activity was 82%, and of time spent in nonsedentary activity, 99.6% was in the light activity range.Conclusions: In conclusion, the present study confirms that people with symptomatic LSS, neurogenic claudication, walking limitations, and LSS-related disability are extremely sedentary and are not meeting guidelines for physical activity. There is an urgent need for interventions aimed at reducing sedentary behavior and increasing the overall level of physical activity in LSS, not only to improve function but also to prevent diseases of inactivity. The present study suggests that reducing sedentary time, increasing time spent in light intensity activity, and increasing time spent in higher intensities of light activity may be appropriate as initial goals for exercise interventions in people with symptomatic LSS and neurogenic claudication, transitioning to moderate activity when appropriate. Results of the present study also demonstrate the importance of employing disease-specific measures for assessment of performance in LSS, and highlight the potential value of these methods for developing targeted and realistic goals for physical activity. Physical activity goals could be personalized using objective assessment of performance with accelerometry. The present study is one step toward a personalized medicine approach for people with LSS, focusing on increasing physical function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]