Determine the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of fluoroscopically- or ultrasound-guided caudal epidural steroid injections (ESIs) with or without catheter placement for the treatment of chronic low back (CLBP), radicular pain, and/or chronic post-surgical back pain (CPSBP).
Chronic axial low back pain due to zygapophysial joint arthropathy is best diagnosed via lumbar medial branch block (MBB). However, the paradigm by which MBB is used to select patients for lumbar radiofrequency neurotomy (RFN) is contested. Dual diagnostic lumbar MBB with a minimum of ≥80% pain relief to diagnose lumbar zygapophysial joint pain are accepted by some Medicare Local Coverage Determination (LCD) as the method for selecting patients for RFN for the management of lumbar zygapophysial joint pain. However, some argue that dual diagnostic MBB and the ≥80% pain relief threshold lack utility in clinical practice, given that those that progress from MBB1 to MBB2 will then flow from MBB2 to RFN without fail.
The American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) identified a significant gap in resources and guidelines that aim to educate healthcare providers for best practices when engaging on social media. As part of the broader initiatives on Spine and Nerve practice, the executive board of ASPN has decided it would be beneficial to include comprehensive guidance for healthcare providers when engaging on social media.
Introduction Applicants to chronic pain medicine fellowship programs often express confusion regarding the importance of various selection criteria. This study sought to elucidate program directors’ considerations in applicant selection for fellowship interviews and ranking and to correlate these criteria with match statistics to provide a guide for prospective candidates. Methods An electronic survey was sent to all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited chronic pain fellowship directors. The importance of various applicant characteristics were evaluated and compared with recent match data. Results Fifty-seven program directors completed the survey. The most important factors involved in applicant interview selection were perceived commitment to the specialty, letters of recommendation from pain faculty, scholarly activities, and leadership experiences. Although completion of a pain rotation was valued highly, experience with procedures was of relatively low importance. There was no preference if rotations were completed within the responders’ department. Variability was noted when considering internal applicants or the applicant’s geographic location. When citing main factors in ranking applicants, interpersonal skills, interview impression and applicant’s fit within the institution were highly ranked by most responders. Discussion Assessment of an applicant’s commitment to chronic pain is challenging. Most responders prioritize the applicant’s commitment to chronic pain as a specialty, scholarly activity, participation in chronic pain rotations, pain-related conferences and letters of recommendation from pain faculty. Chronic pain medicine fellowship candidates should establish a progressive pattern of genuine interest and involvement within the specialty during residency training to optimize their fellowship match potential.
The most common presentation of cluneal neuropathy is ipsilateral low back and gluteal pain. Cluneal neuralgia has been described historically in surgical contexts, with much of the description and treatment related to entrapment and decompression, respectively. Treatment options for addressing axial low back pain have evolved with advancements in the field of interventional pain medicine, though clinical results remain inconsistent. Recent attention has turned toward peripheral nerve stimulation. Nonsurgical interventions targeting the superior and medial cluneal nerve branches have been performed in cases of low back and buttock pain, but there is no known review of the resulting evidence to support these practices.In this manuscript we provide a robust exploration and analysis of the available literature regarding treatment options for cluneal neuropathy. We provide clinical manifestations and recommendations for future study direction.Narrative review.This was a systematic, evidence-based narrative, performed after extensive review of the literature to identify all manuscripts associated with interventional treatment of the superior and medial cluneal nerves.Eleven manuscripts fulfilled inclusion criteria. Interventional treatment of the superior and middle cluneal nerves includes blockade with corticosteroid, alcohol neurolysis, peripheral nerve stimulation, radiofrequency neurotomy, and surgical decompression.The supportive evidence for interventions in cluneal neuropathy is largely lacking due to small, uncontrolled, observational studies with multiple confounding factors. There is no standardized definition of cluneal neuropathy.Limited studies promote beneficial effects from interventions intended to target cluneal neuropathy. Despite increased emphasis and treatment options for this condition, there is little consensus on the diagnostic criteria, endpoints, and measures of therapeutics, or procedural techniques for blocks, radiofrequency, and neuromodulation. It is imperative to delineate pathology associated with the cluneal nerves and perform rigorous analysis of associated treatment options.
Objective: To describe functional outcomes following discharge from an acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) in patients following epilepsy surgery, comparing laser interstitial thermal therapy (LITT) versus surgical resection for epilepsy. Design: Retrospective case series. Setting: Academic tertiary hospital. Participants: Eight patients who received LITT ( n = 3) or surgical resection ( n = 5) for epilepsy. Interventions: Acute inpatient rehabilitation. Main Outcome Measures: Functional independence measure (FIM), seizure incidence, discharge destination. Level of Evidence: IV. Results: The epilepsy cohort demonstrated a FIM change of 38.88 (vs. national average 29.55), average length of stay (LOS) of 15.13 days (vs. 13.38 days), and LOS efficiency was 3.4 (vs. 2.68). No patients in the epilepsy cohort were discharged to acute care hospital compared to a national average of 9.82%. Eighty-seven percent in the epilepsy cohort discharged to home (vs. 77%) and 12.5% to skilled nursing facility (vs. 11.90%). Between the subset who received LITT and those who received surgical resection, there was no statistically significant change in mean total FIM change (43.7 vs. 36), FIM efficiency (5.3 vs. 2.2), or FIM change in subset measures of memory (0.5 vs. 0.25) or problem solving (0 vs. 0.8). There was no statistical significance between groups in adverse events, including seizure. Conclusions: Outcome measures in this population appear to be consistent with national outcome measures for other IRF diagnoses. This suggests that acute inpatient rehabilitation should be considered after patients undergo surgical intervention for epilepsy. However, a larger sample size and controlled studies are necessary before generalizations can be made. In addition, no statistically significant functional difference was seen between patients who underwent LITT or surgical resection.
Given a previous review on emu oil from 2014, which concluded a lack of clinical trial evidence, these authors set out to summarize the literature with regard to emu oil use for non-specific pain management.Non-specific pain management was selected as Google Trend data suggest that emu oil may be commonly amongst the general population for the treatment of non-specific pain.Using PRISMA guidelines, three randomized, controlled trial studies were identified, which found either no statistically significant difference between emu oil and placebo for pain relief or used a compound, which made it impossible to state that emu oil by itself was responsible for pain reduction.Upon review, there is currently no clinical evidence that emu oil has a therapeutic benefit for the treatment of non-specific pain.
