Search

BACKGROUND: Low back pain and sciatica caused by herniated lumbar discs (HLDs) are common complaints among patients visiting pain clinics. Among the various therapeutic methods, intradiscal ozone injections have emerged as an effective alternative or additional treatment option for HLDs. OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effectiveness of intradiscal ozone injections in the treatment of HLDs. METHODS: We searched the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases for relevant studies published until January 25, 2024. We included studies that investigated the efficacy of intradiscal ozone injections in patients with HLDs. We evaluated the methodological quality of individual studies using the Cochrane Collaboration tool. RESULTS: At ⩾ 6 months after treatment, the therapeutic effect of intradiscal ozone injections in patients with HLDs was greater than that of steroid injections (treatment success rate, 6 months: odds ratio = 3.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] [2.44, 6.39], P < 0.01) or conventional medications (changes in the Visual Analog Scale [VAS], 6 months: standardized mean difference [SMD] = 1.65, 95% CI [1.08, 2.22], P < 0.01; 12 months: SMD = 1.52, 95% CI [0.96, 2.08], P < 0.01) but similar to that of microdiscectomy (changes in VAS, 18 months: SMD = - 0.05, 95% CI [ - 0.67, 0.57], P = 0.87). At < 6 months after treatment, the reduction in the VAS score after intradiscal ozone injections was higher than that after steroid injections (changes in VAS, 1 month: SMD = 2.53, 95% CI [1.84, 3.21], P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Intradiscal ozone injections may be a useful therapeutic tool in patients with HLDs. Compared with other conventional treatment methods such as steroid injections and oral medications, intradiscal ozone injection has great long-term (⩾ 6 months) effectiveness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: Upper crossed syndrome (UCS) is a common musculoskeletal condition that is characterized by tightness and weakness of the muscles of the neck, shoulders, and upper back. The aim of this current study is to summarize and provide an overview of the treatment in patients with UCS. Materials and Methods: A MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane library, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science database search was conducted for English-language articles about upper crossed syndrome that were published until 19 January 2023. To identify potentially relevant articles, the following key search phrases were combined: "upper crossed syndrome", "upper cross syndrome", "diagnosis", and "treatment". A total of 233 articles were identified. After reading the titles and abstracts and assessing their eligibility based on the full-text articles, 11 articles were finally included in this review. The risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using RoB-2 and ROBINS-I for the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the non-randomized clinical trial (non-RCT), respectively. Results: Among eleven studies that investigated the effect of treatment programs for UCS, five studies compared the therapeutic effect of exercise programs with controls, whereas six compared different rehabilitative treatment strategies, such as the muscle energy technique, soft-tissue mobilization, and stretching exercises. In addition, regarding the study design, ten studies were RCTs and only one study was a prospective observational study. Conclusions: Treatment programs including various types of exercises and techniques to correct an abnormal posture and restore neuromuscular imbalances are effective for decreasing pain and improving neck disabilities and postural deviations in patients with UCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]