Top

Skeletal Radiology

Published in:

01-10-2013 | Scientific Article

Lumbar nerve root injections: a prospective cohort outcomes study comparing age- and gender-matched patients who returned an outcomes-based postal questionnaire with patients who did not return the postal questionnaire

Authors: Marco Lechmann, Cynthia K. Peterson, Christian W. A. Pfirrmann, Jürg Hodler

Published in: Skeletal Radiology | Issue 10/2013

Abstract

Objective

The purpose of this study is to investigate if relying on postal questionnaires returned by patients provides an accurate representation of reported outcomes from patients receiving imaging-guided lumbar nerve root injections (NRIs).

Materials and methods

Patients who received imaging-guided transforaminal lumbar NRIs were given short questionnaires inquiring about pain level [numerical rating scale (NRS)] and overall improvement [Patient’s Global Impression of Change (PGIC)]. Those who did not return the questionnaires (non-responders) were telephoned and asked about pain level and overall change in condition. Age and gender matching of responders and non-responders resulted in 97 patients in each group. The proportion of patients reporting clinically relevant “improvement” or “worsening” in each group was calculated and the Chi-square test was used to detect differences. NRS and PGIC scores for responders and non-responders were compared using Student’s t test and the Mann–Whitney U test, respectively.

Results

A higher proportion of non-responders reported clinically relevant improvement (53.6 %) compared to responders (42.6 %) and responders reported significantly higher levels of worsening of condition (p = 0.01). Both responders and non-responders had significant (p ≤ 0.05) improvement on the 20–30-min and 1-month NRS scores compared to their pre-injection baseline scores. Non-responders had significantly higher baseline NRS scores but no significant difference at the 20–30-min and 1-month NRS scores compared to responders.

Conclusions

Patients returning postal questionnaires reported less favorable outcomes compared to those who did not return their questionnaires.

Stewart WF, Ricci JA, Chee E, Morganstein D, Lipton R. Lost productive time and cost due to common pain conditions in the US workforce. JAMA. 2003;290:2443–54.PubMedCrossRef

Eckel T, Bartynski W. Epidural steroid injections and selective nerve root blocks. Tech Vasc Interv Radiol. 2009;12:11–21.PubMedCrossRef

Manchikanti L, Boswell MV, Singh V, Benyamin RM, Fellows B, Abdi S, et al. Comprehensive evidence-based guidelines for interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain. Pain Physician. 2009;12:699–802.PubMed

Peterson C, Hodler J. Evidence-based radiology (part 1): is there sufficient research to support the use of therapeutic injections for the spine and sacroiliac joints? Skeletal Radiol. 2010;39:5–9.PubMedCrossRef

Mendoza-Lattes S, Weiss A, Found E, Zimmerman B, Gao Y. Comparable effectiveness of caudal vs. trans-foraminal epidural steroid injections. Iowa Orthop J. 2009;29:91–6.PubMed

Teske W, Zirke S, Trippe C, et al. Epidural injection therapy with local anaesthetics versus cortisone in the lumbar spine syndrome: a prospective study. Z Orthop Unfall. 2009;147:199–204.PubMedCrossRef

Roberts S, Willick S, Rho M, Rittenberg J. Efficacy of lumbosacral transforaminal epidural steroid injections: a systematic review. PM R. 2009;1:657–68.PubMedCrossRef

Abdi S, Datta S, Trescot A, et al. Epidural steroids in the management of chronic spinal pain: a systematic review. Pain Physician. 2007;10:185–212.PubMed

Datta S, Everett C, Trescot A, et al. An updated systematic review of the diagnostic utility of selective nerve root blocks. Pain Physician. 2007;10:113–28.PubMed

10.

Childs JD, Piva SR, Fritz JM. Responsiveness of the numeric pain rating scale in patients with low back pain. Spine. 2005;30:1331–4.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Newell D, Bolton JE. Responsiveness of the Bournemouth questionnaire in determining minimal clinically important change in subgroups of low back pain patients. Spine. 2010;35:1801–6.PubMedCrossRef

12.

Farrar JT, Young JP, LaMoreaux L, Werth JL, Poole RM. Clinical importance of changes in chronic pain intensity measured on an 11-point numerical pain rating scale. Pain. 2001;94:149–58.PubMedCrossRef

13.

Hurst H, Bolton J. Assessing the clinical significance of change scores recorded on subjective outcome measures. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2004;27:26–35.PubMedCrossRef

14.

Peterson CK, Bolton J, Humphreys BK. Predictors of outcome in neck pain patients undergoing chiropractic care: comparison of acute and chronic patients. Chiropr Manual Therap. 2012;20:27.CrossRef

15.

Peterson CK, Bolton J, Humphreys BK. Predictors of improvement in acute and chronic low back pain patients undergoing chiropractic treatment. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2012;35:525–33.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Humphreys BK, Peterson C. Comparison of outcomes in neck pain patients with and without dizziness undergoing chiropractic treatment: a prospective cohort study with 6-month follow-up. Chiropr Manual Therap. 2013;21:3.CrossRef

17.

Dietrich T, Peterson CK, Brunner F, Hodler J, Pfirrmann CW. Imaging-guided subacromial therapeutic injections: prospective study comparing abnormalities on conventional radiographs with patient outcomes. Accepted for publication in AJR, Dec. 2012.

18.

Ostelo RW, Deyo RA, Stratford P, et al. Interpreting change scores for pain and functional status in low back pain. Spine. 2008;33:90–4.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Johansen B, Wedderkopp N. Comparison between data obtained through real-time data capture by SMS and a retrospective telephone interview. Chiropr Osteopat. 2010;18:10.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Bolton JE, Humphreys BK, van Hedle HJ. Validity of weekly recall ratings of average pain intensity in neck pain patients. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2010;33:612–7.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Perrot S, Rozenberg S, Moyse D, Legout V, Marty M. Comparison of daily, weekly or monthly pain assessments in hip and knee osteoarthritis. A 29-day prospective study. Joint Bone Spine. 2011;78:510–5.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Karaman H, Kavak GO, Tüfek A, Yldrm ZB. The complications of transforaminal lumbar epidural steroid injections. Spine. 2011;36:E819–24.PubMedCrossRef

23.

Kim J, Lonner JH, Nelson CL, Lotke PA. Response bias: effect on outcomes evaluation by mail surveys after total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86-A:15–21.PubMed

Title: Lumbar nerve root injections: a prospective cohort outcomes study comparing age- and gender-matched patients who returned an outcomes-based postal questionnaire with patients who did not return the postal questionnaire
Authors: Marco Lechmann
Cynthia K. Peterson
Christian W. A. Pfirrmann
Jürg Hodler
Publication date: 01-10-2013
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Skeletal Radiology / Issue 10/2013
Print ISSN: 0364-2348
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2161
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00256-013-1673-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Lumbar nerve root injections: a prospective cohort outcomes study comparing age- and gender-matched patients who returned an outcomes-based postal questionnaire with patients who did not return the postal questionnaire

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on sleep in brain health

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Objective

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2013

Late-onset en coup de sabre of the skull

Erratum to: Late diagnosis of a McFarland fracture: imaging and treatment

The deltoid, a forgotten muscle of the shoulder

Browser’s notes

Imaging evaluation of inflammation in the musculoskeletal system: current concepts and perspectives

Multicentric reticulohistiocytosis