23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Journal of Pain Research (submit here)

      This international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal by Dove Medical Press focuses on reporting of high-quality laboratory and clinical findings in all fields of pain research and the prevention and management of pain. Sign up for email alerts here.

      52,235 Monthly downloads/views I 2.832 Impact Factor I 4.5 CiteScore I 1.2 Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) I 0.655 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The potential impact of various diagnostic strategies in cases of chronic pain syndromes associated with lumbar spine degeneration

      case-report

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose

          To study the possible effects of various diagnostic strategies and the relative contribution of various structures in order to determine the optimal diagnostic strategy in treating patients with noncompressive pain syndromes.

          Study design

          Prospective, nonrandomized cohort study of 83 consecutive patients with noncompressive pain syndromes resistant to repeated courses of conservative treatment. The follow-up period was 18 months.

          Results

          Nucleoplasty was effective in cases of discogenic pain; the consequences related to false positive results of the discography were significant. The most specific criterion was 80% pain relief after facet joint blocks, whereas 50% pain relief and any subjective pain relief were not associated with a significant increase in the success rate. A considerable rate of false negative results was associated with 80% pain relief, whereas 50% pain relief after facet joint blocks showed the optimal ratio of sensitivity and specificity. Facet joint pain was detected in 50.6% of cases (95% confidence interval 44.1%–66.3%), discogenic pain in 16.9% cases (95% confidence interval 9.5%–26.7%), and sacroiliac joint pain in 7.2% cases (95% confidence interval 2.7%–15%). It was impossible to differentiate the main source of pain in 25.3% of cases.

          Conclusion

          It is rational to adjust the diagnostic algorithm to the probability of detecting a particular pain source and, in doing so, reduce the number of invasive diagnostic measures to evaluate a pain source. False positive results of diagnostic measures can negatively affect the overall efficacy of a particular technology; therefore, all reasons for the failure should be studied in order to reach an unbiased conclusion. In choosing diagnostic criteria, not only should the success rate of a particular technology be taken into consideration but also the rate of false negative results. Acceptable diagnostic criteria should be based on a rational balance of sensitivity and specificity.

          Most cited references52

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Comprehensive review of epidemiology, scope, and impact of spinal pain.

          Persistent pain interfering with daily activities is common. Chronic pain has been defined in many ways. Chronic pain syndrome is a separate entity from chronic pain. Chronic pain is defined as, "pain that persists 6 months after an injury and beyond the usual course of an acute disease or a reasonable time for a comparable injury to heal, that is associated with chronic pathologic processes that cause continuous or intermittent pain for months or years, that may continue in the presence or absence of demonstrable pathologies; may not be amenable to routine pain control methods; and healing may never occur." In contrast, chronic pain syndrome has been defined as a complex condition with physical, psychological, emotional, and social components. The prevalence of chronic pain in the adult population ranges from 2% to 40%, with a median point prevalence of 15%. Among chronic pain disorders, pain arising from various structures of the spine constitutes the majority of the problems. The lifetime prevalence of spinal pain has been reported as 54% to 80%. Studies of the prevalence of low back pain and neck pain and its impact in general have shown 23% of patients reporting Grade II to IV low back pain (high pain intensity with disability) versus 15% with neck pain. Further, age related prevalence of persistent pain appears to be much more common in the elderly associated with functional limitations and difficulty in performing daily life activities. Chronic persistent low back and neck pain is seen in 25% to 60% of patients, one-year or longer after the initial episode. Spinal pain is associated with significant economic, societal, and health impact. Estimates and patterns of productivity losses and direct health care expenditures among individuals with back and neck pain in the United States continue to escalate. Recent studies have shown significant increases in the prevalence of various pain problems including low back pain. Frequent use of opioids in managing chronic non-cancer pain has been a major issue for health care in the United States placing a significant strain on the economy with the majority of patients receiving opioids for chronic pain necessitating an increased production of opioids, and escalating costs of opioid use, even with normal intake. The additional costs of misuse, abuse, and addiction are enormous. Comorbidities including psychological and physical conditions and numerous other risk factors are common in spinal pain and add significant complexities to the interventionalist's clinical task. This section of the American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians (ASIPP)/Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) guidelines evaluates the epidemiology, scope, and impact of spinal pain and its relevance to health care interventions.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Results of sacroiliac joint double block and value of sacroiliac pain provocation tests in 54 patients with low back pain.

            This prospective study consisted of the evaluation of a double sacroiliac block in patients with low back pain. To determine the prevalence of sacroiliac pain in a selected population of patients suffering from low back pain, and to assess certain pain provocation tests. Previous studies have implicated the sacroliac joint as a potential etiology of back and leg pain, but none has tested double anesthetic blocks in a prospective fashion. Fifty-four patients with unilateral low back pain, pain mapping compatible with a sacroiliac origin, tenderness over the sacroiliac joint, and no obvious source of pain in the lumbar spine were selected for a double anesthetic block. The procedure consisted of a through clinical examination with a visual analog scale, testing of sacroiliac pain provocation tests followed by a first screening block with a short-acting anesthetic. A second examination consisting of the same tests assessed the efficacy of the first block. If results were positive, a confirmatory block was performed. All blocks were performed under fluoroscopic guidance. Nineteen patients had a positive response to the first block. Among them, 10 (18.5%) were temporarily relieved by the confirmatory block. No pain provocation test reached statistical significance. The present study suggests the sacroiliac joint is an uncommon but real source of low back pain. The accuracy of some of the presumed "sacroiliac pain provocations tests" is questioned.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Examining the validity of pressure ulcer risk assessment scales: developing and using illustrated patient simulations to collect the data.

              Simulations are of particular advantage in research studies where large samples are necessary to achieve statistical power and the information must be collected under uniform conditions in order to aid interpretation. In the study reported below, simulation was achieved through the use of medical photography accompanied by case studies of the same patients. All information was collected on the same day. The purpose of the study was to determine the validity of the three pressure ulcer risk assessment scales most commonly used in clinical nursing practice in the UK. Each clinical nurse assessed the same four patients using three risk assessment scales and a visual analogue scale designed to capture their own clinical judgement. External validity was assessed by a panel of tissue viability experts who provided independent ratings. Data were obtained from 236 clinical nurses, yielding 941 risk assessments. Experience with this approach to data collection suggests that it requires careful planning. This should include measures to ensure that the simulated information is valid and that all data collectors have been adequately trained and are able to motivate the nurses participating in the study. Providing consideration is given to these issues, the use of simulation can help to collect data that would be difficult to obtain by more conventional means. It is also important to recognize that clinical decisions are de-contextualized in simulations because they are reduced to verbal and visual summaries. The decision to use simulations should thus be taken only if this is acknowledged.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Pain Res
                J Pain Res
                Journal of Pain Research
                Dove Medical Press
                1178-7090
                2013
                17 April 2013
                : 6
                : 289-296
                Affiliations
                Scientific Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, Nizhniy Novgorod, Russian Federation
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Andrey Bokov, Scientific Research Institute of Traumatology and Orthopedics, Verkhnyaya Volzhskaya Naberezhnaya – 18, Nizhniy Novgorod 603155, Russian Federation, Tel +7 910 798 5159, Fax +7 831 278 7901, Email andrei_bokov@ 123456mail.ru
                Article
                jpr-6-289
                10.2147/JPR.S42646
                3636805
                23637553
                7274c44d-4919-47bd-9f08-2e5032c122dc
                © 2013 Bokov et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Categories
                Case Series

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                diagnostic strategy,lumbar spine,noncompressive pain,sensitivity,specificity

                Comments

                Comment on this article