Novel treatment of onychomycosis using over-the-counter mentholated ointment: a clinical case series.

BACKGROUND: current medication treatments for onychomycosis have less than full cure-rate efficacy and have the potential for adverse side effects. Vicks VapoRub (The Proctor & Gamble Company, Cincinnati, OH) has been advocated in the lay literature as an effective treatment for onychomycosis. This pilot study tested Vicks VapoRub as a safe, cost-effective alternative for treating toenail onychomycosis. METHODS: eighteen participants were recruited to use Vicks VapoRub as treatment for onychomycosis. Participants were followed at intervals of 4, 8, 12, 24, 36, and 48 weeks; digital photographs were obtained during initial and follow-up visits. Primary outcome measures were mycological cure at 48 weeks and clinical cure through subjective assessment of appearance and quantifiable change in the area of affected nail by digital photography analysis. Patient satisfaction was a secondary outcome, measured using a single-item questionnaire scored by a 5-point Likert scale. RESULTS: fifteen of the 18 participants (83%) showed a positive treatment effect; 5 (27.8%) had a mycological and clinical cure at 48 weeks; 10 (55.6%) had partial clearance, and 3 (16.7%) showed no change. All 18 participants rated their satisfaction with the nail appearance at the end of the study as "satisfied" (n = 9) or "very satisfied" (n = 9). CONCLUSIONS: Vicks VapoRub seems to have a positive clinical effect in the treatment onychomycosis.

The efficacy of two electrodes radiofrequency technique: comparison study using a cadaveric interspinous ligament and temperature measurement using egg white.

BACKGROUND: One technique in radiofrequency neurotomies uses 2 electrodes that are simultaneously placed to lie parallel to one another. Comparing lesions on cadaveric interspinous ligament tissue and measuring the temperature change in egg white allows us to accurately measure quantitatively the area of the lesion. METHODS: Fresh cadaver spinal tissue and egg white tissue were used. A series of samples were prepared with the electrodes placed 1 to 7 mm apart. Using radiofrequency, the needle electrodes were heated in sequential or simultaneous order and the distance of the escaped lesion area and temperature were measured. RESULTS: Samples of cadaver interspinous ligament showed sequential heating of the needles limits the placement of the needle electrodes up to 2 mm apart from each other and up to 4 mm apart when heated simultaneously. The temperature at the escaped lesion area decreased according to the distance for egg white. There was a significant difference in temperature at the escaped lesion area up to 6 mm apart and the temperature was above 50 degrees celsius up to 5 mm in simultaneous lesion and 3 mm in the sequential lesion. LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this study include cadaveric experimentation and use of intraspinous ligament rather than medial branch of the dorsal ramus which is difficult to identify. CONCLUSION: Heating the 2 electrodes simultaneously appears to coagulate a wider area and potentially produce better results in less time.

Comprehensive evidence-based guidelines for interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain.

BACKGROUND: Comprehensive, evidence-based guidelines for interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain are described here to provide recommendations for clinicians. OBJECTIVE: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic spinal pain. DESIGN: Systematic assessment of the literature. METHODS: Strength of evidence was assessed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) criteria utilizing 5 levels of evidence ranging from Level I to III with 3 subcategories in Level II. OUTCOMES: Short-term pain relief was defined as relief lasting at least 6 months and long-term relief was defined as longer than 6 months, except for intradiscal therapies, mechanical disc decompression, spinal cord stimulation and intrathecal infusion systems, wherein up to one year relief was considered as short-term. RESULTS: The indicated evidence for accuracy of diagnostic facet joint nerve blocks is Level I or II-1 in the diagnosis of lumbar, thoracic, and cervical facet joint pain. The evidence for lumbar and cervical provocation discography and sacroiliac joint injections is Level II-2, whereas it is Level II-3 for thoracic provocation discography. The indicated evidence for therapeutic interventions is Level I for caudal epidural steroid injections in managing disc herniation or radiculitis, and discogenic pain without disc herniation or radiculitis. The evidence is Level I or II-1 for percutaneous adhesiolysis in management of pain secondary to post-lumbar surgery syndrome. The evidence is Level II-1 or II-2 for therapeutic cervical, thoracic, and lumbar facet joint nerve blocks; for caudal epidural injections in managing pain of post-lumbar surgery syndrome, and lumbar spinal stenosis, for cervical interlaminar epidural injections in managing cervical pain (Level II-1); for lumbar transforaminal epidural injections; and spinal cord stimulation for post-lumbar surgery syndrome. The indicated evidence for intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET), mechanical disc decompression with automated percutaneous lumbar discectomy (APLD), and percutaneous lumbar laser discectomy (PLDD) is Level II-2. LIMITATIONS: The limitations of these guidelines include a continued paucity of the literature, lack of updates, and conflicts in preparation of systematic reviews and guidelines by various organizations. CONCLUSION: The indicated evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic interventions is variable from Level I to III. These guidelines include the evaluation of evidence for diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in managing chronic spinal pain and recommendations for managing spinal pain. However, these guidelines do not constitute inflexible treatment recommendations. Further, these guidelines also do not represent "standard of care."

Reassessment of evidence synthesis of occupational medicine practice guidelines for interventional pain management.

BACKGROUND: Appropriately developed practice guidelines present statements of best practice based on a thorough evaluation of the evidence from published studies on the outcomes of treatments, which include the application of multiple methods for collecting and evaluating evidence for a wide range of clinical interventions and disciplines. However, the guidelines are neither infallible, nor a substitute for clinical judgment. While the guideline development process is a complex phenomenon, conflict of interest in guideline development and inappropriate methodologies must be avoided. It has been alleged that the guidelines by the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM) prevent injured workers from receiving the majority of medically necessary and appropriate interventional pain management services. An independent critical appraisal of both chapters of the ACOEM guidelines showed startling findings with a conclusion that these guidelines may not be applied in patient care as they scored below 30% in the majority of evaluations utilizing multiple standardized criteria. OBJECTIVE: To reassess the evidence synthesis for the ACOEM guidelines for the low back pain and chronic pain chapters utilizing an expanded methodology, which includes the criteria included in the ACOEM guidelines with the addition of omitted literature and application of appropriate criteria. METHODS: For reassessment, randomized trials were utilized as it was in the preparation of the guidelines. In this process, quality of evidence was assessed and recommendations were made based on grading recommendations of Guyatt et al. The level of evidence was determined utilizing the quality of evidence criteria developed by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF), as well as the outdated quality of evidence criteria utilized by ACOEM in the guideline preparation. Methodologic quality of each individual article was assessed utilizing the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) methodologic assessment criteria for diagnostic interventions and Cochrane methodologic quality assessment criteria for therapeutic interventions. RESULTS: The results of reassessment are vastly different from the conclusions derived by the ACOEM guidelines. The differences in strength of rating for the diagnosis of discogenic pain by provocation discography and facet joint pain by diagnostic facet joint nerve blocks is established with strong evidence. Therapeutic cervical and lumbar medial branch blocks and radiofrequency neurolysis, therapeutic thoracic medial branch blocks, cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections, caudal epidural steroid injections, lumbar transforaminal epidural injections, percutaneous and endoscopic adhesiolysis, and spinal cord stimulation qualified for moderate to strong evidence. Additional insight is also provided for evidence rating for intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET), automated percutaneous disc decompression, and intrathecal implantables. CONCLUSION: The reassessment and reevaluation of the low back and chronic pain chapters of the ACOEM guidelines present results that are vastly different from the published and proposed guidelines. Contrary to ACOEM's conclusions of insufficient evidence for most interventional techniques, the results illustrate moderate to strong evidence for most diagnostic and therapeutic interventional techniques.

Review of occupational medicine practice guidelines for interventional pain management and potential implications.

In the modern day environment, workers' compensation costs continue to be a challenge, with a need to balance costs, benefits, and quality of medical care. The cost of workers' compensation care affects all stakeholders including workers, employers, providers, regulators, legislators, and insurers. Consequently, a continued commitment to quality, accessibility to care, and cost containment will help ensure that workers are afforded accessible, high quality, and cost-effective care. In 2004, workers' compensation programs in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and federal programs in the United States combined received an income of $87.4 billion while paying out only $56 billion in medical and cash benefits with $31.4 billion or 37% in administrative expenses and profit. Occupational diseases represented only 8% of the workers' compensation claims and 29% of the cost. The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM) has published several guidelines; though widely adopted by WCPs, these guidelines evaluate the practice of medicine of multiple specialties without adequate expertise and expert input from the concerned specialties, including interventional pain management. An assessment of the ACOEM guidelines utilizing Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) criteria, the criteria developed by the American Medical Association (AMA), the Institute of Medicine (IOM), and other significantly accepted criteria, consistently showed very low scores (< 30%) in most aspects of the these guidelines. The ACOEM recommendations do not appear to have been based on a careful review of the literature, overall quality of evidence, standard of care, or expert consensus. Based on the evaluation utilizing appropriate and current evidence-based medicine (EBM) principles, the evidence ratings for diagnostic techniques of lumbar discography; cervical, thoracic, and lumbar facet joint nerve blocks and sacroiliac joint nerve blocks; therapeutic cervical and lumbar medial branch blocks and radiofrequency neurolysis; cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections, caudal epidural steroid injections, and lumbar transforaminal epidural injections; caudal percutaneous adhesiolysis; abd spinal cord stimulation were found to be moderate with strong recommendation applying for most patients in most circumstances. The evidence ratings for intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET), an automated percutaneous disc decompression and also deserve further scrutiny and analysis. In conclusion, these ACOEM guidelines for interventional pain management have no applicability in modern patient care due to lack of expertise by the developing organization (ACOEM), lack of utilization of appropriate and current EBM principles, and lack of significant involvement of experts in these techniques resulting in a lack of clinical relevance. Thus, they may result in reduced medical quality of care; may severely hinder access to appropriate, medically needed and essential medical care; and finally, they may increase costs for injured workers, third party payors, and the government by transferring the injured worker into a non-productive disability system.

Evidence-informed management of chronic low back pain with intradiscal electrothermal therapy.

The management of chronic low back pain (CLBP) has proven very challenging in North America, as evidenced by its mounting socioeconomic burden. Choosing among available nonsurgical therapies can be overwhelming for many stakeholders, including patients, health providers, policy makers, and third-party payers. Although all parties share a common goal and wish to use limited health-care resources to support interventions most likely to result in clinically meaningful improvements, there is often uncertainty about the most appropriate intervention for a particular patient. To help understand and evaluate the various commonly used nonsurgical approaches to CLBP, the North American Spine Society has sponsored this special focus issue of The Spine Journal, titled Evidence-Informed Management of Chronic Low Back Pain Without Surgery. Articles in this special focus issue were contributed by leading spine practitioners and researchers, who were invited to summarize the best available evidence for a particular intervention and encouraged to make this information accessible to nonexperts. Each of the articles contains five sections (description, theory, evidence of efficacy, harms, and summary) with common subheadings to facilitate comparison across the 24 different interventions profiled in this special focus issue, blending narrative and systematic review methodology as deemed appropriate by the authors. It is hoped that articles in this special focus issue will be informative and aid in decision making for the many stakeholders evaluating nonsurgical interventions for CLBP.

A factor analysis of lumbar intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty outcomes.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty (IDET) is a minimally invasive procedure for managing chronic discogenic low back pain (LBP). Although there have been numerous reports of IDET outcome rates, few have dissected the detailed factors affecting those outcomes. PURPOSE: To evaluate how heating variables and the number of catheters used affect the outcomes and pain flare-up in LBP patients treated with IDET. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective analysis. PATIENT SAMPLE: Data were gathered on the basis of chart records from January 6, 1999 to January 6, 2000. Twenty-five cases treated at a single level with disc protrusion < or = 2 mm, nonfocal neurological abnormalities, and positive discogram with annular tear were studied. Six patients were unavailable for follow-up at 16 months. OUTCOME MEASURES: All assessments were incorporated into our own evaluation sheet, completed before the procedure and at follow-up. Assessments included the following: 1) Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and 2) Back Pain Improvement Scales (BPI) preoperatively and at 8 and 16 months post-procedure. Post-procedure flare-up of the pain was defined as the pain aggravation after the IDET procedure from the pre-procedure baseline pain. It was evaluated by a 10-point numeric rating scale, ranging from no aggravated pain "0" to the worst aggravated pain "10". METHODS: Patients were partitioned into a single-catheter group and a double-catheter group. In these two groups, statistical analyses were done to compare the outcomes and flare-up duration and intensity. In each catheter group, the correlation coefficients were analyzed between heating variables such as heating duration/temperature and two outcome scales. Then, two outcome scales relative to intensity and duration of post-IDET flare-up were analyzed with Pearson's correlation. Also the combined effect of the heating duration and temperature was evaluated as a thermal dosage, which is the total amount of heat developed during the procedure. It was calculated by multiplying the temperature and its heating duration above a starting temperature of 65 degrees C. RESULTS: Comparing the single- and double-catheter groups, patients placed in the single-catheter group showed significantly shorter flare-up duration (11.00+/-19.17 vs. 24.89+/-20.84 days, p < .05). In the single-catheter group, the flare-up duration manifested moderate linear correlation with heating variables (0.580 with temperature, 0.519 with thermal dosage, p < .05). Also, the improvements of pain with VAS displayed moderate reverse correlation with heating variables at 8 months (-.436 with temperature, -0.439 with thermal dosage, p < .1). In the double-catheter group, the Back Pain Improvement% had strong reverse correlations with temperature and thermal dosage at 8 months (-.735 and -.729, p < .05). The correlation between the improvement of VAS and temperature yielded a moderate reverse relationship (-.619, p < 0.1). These correlations were not, however, observed at 16 months in either the single- or double-catheter groups. CONCLUSIONS: Higher temperatures and larger total heating doses during IDET procedures with catheters placed in the outer annulus may increase the duration of post-procedure pain flare-ups and lead to less favorable outcomes at 8 months follow-up. The long-term outcomes at 16 months may, however, not be affected by these heating variables.

Percutaneous disc decompression in the management of chronic low back pain.

Although there has not yet been a percutaneous intradiscal procedure developed with the superior therapeutic efficacy of open surgery, these procedures are less invasive and avoid the complications of open surgery. All of these procedures have limitations, but their therapeutic effect increases substantially given careful patient selection and proper technique. New appliances and techniques to treat LBP or sciatica continue to evolve, and numerous controlled studies are underway. With tremendous technologic advances, use of minimally invasive techniques to treat chronic back pain continues to expand.