Serum cortisol level to screen for significant hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression in patients receiving multiple steroid injections.

BACKGROUND: Morning serum cortisol level (mSCL) is a practical screening tool for hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis suppression and has been used to assess for duration of cortisol deficiency after epidural and peripheral glucocorticoid injections. More evidence is needed to establish the utility of mSCL in patients undergoing repeat injections with increasing cumulative glucocorticoid equivalent dose (CGED) that could place them at higher risk of HPA axis suppression. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of spine injection candidates with significant HPA axis suppression (sigAS), to understand the correlation between 12 months of CGED and the presence of sigAS based on the timing of mSCL collection after the most recent glucocorticoid injection (within 6 weeks or between 6 weeks and 12 months), and to investigate demographic and clinical factors relating to sigAS. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients scheduled for spine injection who had an associated mSCL and documented histories of prior glucocorticoid injections. The steroid name, dose, type, and procedure location were recorded for each injection that occurred within 12 months before mSCL. CGED was calculated from standard glucocorticoid equivalent conversion factors. RESULTS: SigAS was present in 7.8% to 22% of the analysis cohorts. There was no association found between CGED and sigAS regardless of timing of mSCL. There was a trend toward lower mSCL and sigAS with increasing CGED. There were no significant relationships found between sigAS and overall demographic or clinical factors. CONCLUSIONS: A 3-fold reduction in the rate of sigAS was noted 6 weeks after the most recent steroid injection. Using mSCL provides a template to investigate the impact of CGED and the best timing for mSCL collection in order to define a more practical guideline to identify patients at higher risk of sigAS earlier and plan for future spine injections.

Effectiveness of Physical Therapy Combined With Epidural Steroid Injection for Individuals With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Parallel-Group Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of epidural steroid injection (ESI) and back education with and without physical therapy (PT) in individuals with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Orthopedic spine clinics. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 390 individuals were screened with 60 eligible and randomly selected to receive ESI and education with or without PT (N=54). INTERVENTIONS: A total of 54 individuals received 1-3 injections and education in a 10-week intervention period, with 31 receiving injections and education only (ESI) and 23 additionally receiving 8-10 sessions of multimodal PT (ESI+PT). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Disability, pain, quality of life, and global rating of change were collected at 10 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year and analyzed using linear mixed model analysis. RESULTS: No significant difference was found between ESI and ESI+PT in the Oswestry Disability Index at any time point, although the sample had significant improvements at 10 weeks (P<.001; 95% confidence interval [CI], -18.01 to -5.51) and 1 year (P=.01; 95% CI, -14.57 to -2.03) above minimal clinically important difference. Significant differences in the RAND 36-Item Short Form Health Survey 1.0 were found for ESI+PT at 10 weeks with higher emotional role function (P=.03; 95% CI, -49.05 to -8.01), emotional well-being (P=.02; 95% CI, -19.52 to -2.99), and general health perception (P=.05; 95% CI, -17.20 to -.78). CONCLUSIONS: Epidural steroid injection plus PT was not superior to ESI alone for reducing disability in individuals with LSS. Significant benefit was found for the addition of PT related to quality of life factors of emotional function, emotional well-being, and perception of general health.

A randomized trial of epidural glucocorticoid injections for spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Epidural glucocorticoid injections are widely used to treat symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis, a common cause of pain and disability in older adults. However, rigorous data are lacking regarding the effectiveness and safety of these injections. METHODS: In a double-blind, multisite trial, we randomly assigned 400 patients who had lumbar central spinal stenosis and moderate-to-severe leg pain and disability to receive epidural injections of glucocorticoids plus lidocaine or lidocaine alone. The patients received one or two injections before the primary outcome evaluation, performed 6 weeks after randomization and the first injection. The primary outcomes were the score on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ, in which scores range from 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating greater physical disability) and the rating of the intensity of leg pain (on a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating "pain as bad as you can imagine"). RESULTS: At 6 weeks, there were no significant between-group differences in the RMDQ score (adjusted difference in the average treatment effect between the glucocorticoid-lidocaine group and the lidocaine-alone group, -1.0 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.1 to 0.1; P=0.07) or the intensity of leg pain (adjusted difference in the average treatment effect, -0.2 points; 95% CI, -0.8 to 0.4; P=0.48). A prespecified secondary subgroup analysis with stratification according to type of injection (interlaminar vs. transforaminal) likewise showed no significant differences at 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis, epidural injection of glucocorticoids plus lidocaine offered minimal or no short-term benefit as compared with epidural injection of lidocaine alone. (Funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01238536.).

Conservative Care in Lumbar Spine Surgery Trials: A Descriptive Literature Review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the degree to which conservative care and failure were specifically defined in studies comparing nonoperative treatment versus surgery for low back pain (LBP) conditions in adults. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive literature search was conducted by an experienced librarian using MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Google Scholar, and CENTRAL from January 2003 to June 2014. Endnote bibliographic management application was used to remove duplicates and organize the citations. STUDY SELECTION: Prospective, randomized, or cohort trials comparing surgery versus conservative intervention for patients with LBP conditions. Study selection was conducted by 2 independent reviewers. DATA EXTRACTION: Three independent reviewers extracted data from each article using a structured data extraction form. Data extracted included type of study, participant characteristics, sample size, description, and duration of conservative care and whether failed conservative care criterion was defined. DATA SYNTHESIS: A total of 852 unique records were screened for eligibility; of those, 72 articles were identified for further full-text review. Thirty-four full texts were excluded based on the exclusion criteria, and 38 articles, representing 20 unique studies, were included for qualitative synthesis. Fifteen of the 20 studies defined the duration of conservative care. Only 3 studies defined the dosage of physical therapy sessions, including total number of visits and visit duration. Two studies described medication usage, including the duration and type. No studies specifically defined what constituted failed conservative therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This literature review suggests conservative care is poorly defined in randomized trials, which can lead to ambiguity of research procedures and unclear guidelines for clinicians. Future studies should increase transparency and explicitly define conservative care.

Long-Term Effects of Repeated Injections of Local Anesthetic With or Without Corticosteroid for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the overall long-term effectiveness of treatment with epidural corticosteroid injections for lumbar central spinal stenosis and the effect of repeat injections, including crossover injections, on outcomes through 12 months. DESIGN: Multicenter, double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing epidural injections of corticosteroid plus lidocaine versus lidocaine alone. SETTING: Sixteen clinical sites. PARTICIPANTS: Participants with imaging-confirmed lumbar central spinal stenosis (N=400). INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to receive either epidural injections with corticosteroid plus lidocaine or lidocaine alone with the option of blinded crossover after 6 weeks to receive the alternate treatment. Participants could receive 1 to 2 injections from 0 to 6 weeks and up to 2 injections from 6 to 12 weeks. After 12 weeks, participants received usual care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes were the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) (range, 0-24, where higher scores indicate greater disability) and leg pain intensity (range, 0 [no pain] to 10 [pain as bad as you can imagine]). Secondary outcomes included opioid use, spine surgery, and crossover rates. RESULTS: At 12 months, both treatment groups maintained initial observed improvements, with no significant differences between groups on the RDQ (adjusted mean difference, -0.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.6 to 0.9; P=.55), leg pain (adjusted mean difference, 0.1; 95% CI, -0.5 to 0.7; P=.75), opioid use (corticosteroid plus lidocaine: 41.4% vs lidocaine alone: 36.3%; P=.41), or spine surgery (corticosteroid plus lidocaine: 16.8% vs lidocaine alone: 11.8%; P=.22). Fewer participants randomized to corticosteroid plus lidocaine (30%, n=60) versus lidocaine alone (45%, n=90) crossed over after 6 weeks (P=.003). Among participants who crossed over at 6 weeks, the 6- to 12-week RDQ change did not differ between the 2 randomized treatment groups (adjusted mean difference, -1.0; 95% CI, -2.6 to 0.7; P=.24). In both groups, participants crossing over at 6 weeks had worse 12-month trajectories compared with participants who did not choose to crossover. CONCLUSIONS: For lumbar spinal stenosis symptoms, epidural injections of corticosteroid plus lidocaine offered no benefits from 6 weeks to 12 months beyond that of injections of lidocaine alone in terms of self-reported pain and function or reduction in use of opioids and spine surgery. In patients with improved pain and function 6 weeks after initial injection, these outcomes were maintained at 12 months. However, the trajectories of pain and function outcomes after 3 weeks did not differ by injectate type. Repeated injections of either type offered no additional long-term benefit if injections in the first 6 weeks did not improve pain.

Reliability and Practicality of the Core Score: Four Dynamic Core Stability Tests Performed in a Physician Office Setting.

OBJECTIVE: Pilot study to determine the practicality and inter-rater reliability of the "Core Score," a composite measure of 4 clinical core stability tests. DESIGN: Repeated measures. SETTING: Academic hospital physician clinic. PARTICIPANTS: 23 healthy volunteers with mean age of 32 years (12 females, 11 males). ASSESSMENT OF VARIABLES: All subjects performed 4 core stability maneuvers under direct observation from 3 independent physicians in sequence. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Inter-rater reliability and time necessary to perform examination. RESULTS: The Core Score scale is 0 to 12, with 12 reflecting the best core stability. The mean composite score of all 4 tests for all subjects was 9.54 (SD, 1.897; range, 4-12). The intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC 1,1) for inter-rater reliability for the composite Core Score and 4 individual tests were 0.68 (Core Score), 0.14 (single-leg squat), 0.40 (supine bridge), 0.69 (side bridge), and 0.46 (prone bridge). The time required for a single examiner to assess a given subject's core stability in all 4 maneuvers averaged 4 minutes (range, 2-6 minutes). CONCLUSIONS: Even without specialized equipment, a clinically practical and moderately reliable measure of core stability may be possible. Further research is necessary to optimize this measure for clinical application. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Despite the known value of core stability to athletes and patients with low back pain, there is currently no reliable and practical means for rating core stability in a typical office-based practice. This pilot study provides a starting point for future reliability research on clinical core stability assessments.

Feasibility and acceptability of a telemedicine triage model among Medicaid patients with low back pain referred to a spine center.

Background: The data for primary triage via telemedicine for spine related conditions are sparse but has potential to improve access, quality of care, and offer significant cost savings for Medicaid insured patients who have very limited access to care. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a telehealth triage framework using synchronous video conferencing appointments. Methods: This is a prospective cohort feasibility study conducted within an academic spine center in the United States. Participants include Medicaid insured patients referred to an academic spine center for low back pain. We collected demographic information, a spine red flag survey, a patient satisfaction survey and demand and implementation feasibility metrics. Participants completed a demographic and red-flag survey followed by a telehealth spine appointment with a physiatrist. Immediately after the appointment, the participant completed a satisfaction survey. Results: Nineteen patients met inclusion criteria but declined telehealth either due to preference for in-person appointment or lack of comfort with technology. Thirty-three participants enrolled and attended their initial telehealth appointment. Few participants reporting 1 or more red flag symptom also screened positive during their subsequent telehealth evaluation with the physician (n=7/28). Participant satisfaction was high across all domains including ease of scheduling, efficiency of virtual check in, ability to report their symptoms fully and accurately to the provider, imaging review, explanation of diagnosis and treatment plan. Most participants (n=19/20, 95%) would recommend an initial telehealth appointment. Conclusions: The telehealth framework used was feasible and provided an acceptable form of care for Medicaid patients who were interested and able to participate in this form of care. Our acceptability results are promising but should be interpreted with caution given the proportion of patients who declined to participate.

A randomized controlled trial of hamstring stretching: comparison of four techniques.

This study compared the efficacy of 4 different hamstring-stretching techniques. Flexibility can be achieved by a variety of stretching techniques, yet little research has been performed on the most effective method. The 2 basic types include active stretching, in which range of motion is increased through voluntary contraction, and passive stretching, in which range of motion is increased through external assistance. The 2 types of active stretching include neuromobilization and proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation (PNF). Our study aims to determine which type of stretching technique is most effective in improving hamstring length. One hundred subjects between the ages of 21 and 57 were enrolled in the study. Intrarater reliability of hamstring length measurement was performed using 10 subjects. All 100 subjects were included in a randomized controlled trial of 5 different groups comparing different hamstring-stretching techniques. Outcome measures, including hamstring length and perceived level of hamstring tightness, were recorded on all subjects initially, at 4 weeks, and at 8 weeks. After 4 weeks of stretching, there was a statistically significant improvement in hamstring length (p < 0.05) using active stretches as compared with passive stretches. From weeks 4 through 8, hamstring length for the active stretching groups decreased. After 8 weeks of stretching, the straight leg raise (SLR) passive stretch group had the greatest improvement in hamstring length. There was no correlation between hamstring flexibility and age, initial tightness, or frequency of exercise per week. Improvement in hamstring flexibility was greatest for the SLR passive stretch. Also, using PNF in the 90/90 active stretch provided better knee range-of-motion improvements than the 90/90 passive methods did.

Functional scores and subjective responses of injured workers with back or neck pain treated with chiropractic care in an integrative program: a retrospective analysis of 100 cases.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to report on integrative care for the treatment of injured workers with neck or back pain referred to a doctor of chiropractic from a medical or osteopathic provider. METHODS: This retrospective case series study evaluated data on 100 patients referred for chiropractic care of work-related spinal injuries involving workers' compensation claims. Deidentified data included age, sex, visual analog scale scores for pain, pre- and posttreatment Functional Rating Index (FRI) scores, and subjective response to chiropractic care. Based on date of injury to first chiropractic treatment, patients were subdivided as acute, subacute, or chronic injured workers. Cases were analyzed for differences in pretreatment FRI scores, posttreatment FRI scores, FRI change scores (posttreatment FRI minus pretreatment FRI score), and subjective percentage improvement using a 1-way analysis of variance. Treatment included manual therapy techniques and exercise. RESULTS: Injured workers with either an acute or subacute injury had significantly lower posttreatment FRI scores compared with individuals with a chronic injury. The FRI change scores were significantly greater in the acute group compared with either the subacute or chronic injured workers. Workers in all categories showed improved posttreatment tolerance for work-related activities and significantly lower posttreatment subjective pain scores. CONCLUSIONS: The study identified positive effects of chiropractic management included in integrative care when treating work-related neck or back pain. Improvement in both functional scores and subjective response was noted in all 3 time-based phases of patient status (acute, subacute, and chronic).

Clinical Course of Motor Deficits from Lumbosacral Radiculopathy Due to Disk Herniation.

BACKGROUND: The clinical course of motor deficits from lumbosacral radiculopathy appears to improve with or without surgery. Strength measurements have been confined to manual muscle testing (MMT) and have not been extensively followed and quantified in prior studies. OBJECTIVE: To determine if motor weakness and patient-reported outcomes related to lumbosacral radiculopathy improve without surgical intervention over the course of 12 months. DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort. SETTING: Outpatient academic spine practice. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with acute radicular weakness due to disk herniation. METHODS: Forty patients with radiculopathy and strength deficit were followed over a 12-month period. Objective strength and performance tests as well as survey-based measurements were collected at baseline and then every 3 months. Patients underwent comprehensive pain management and rehabilitation and/or surgical approaches as determined in coordination with the treating specialist. This study was approved by the institutional review board of Colorado. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Testing of strength was through MMT, handheld dynamometer, and performance-based testing. Furthermore, visual analog scale, modified Oswestry Disability Index, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) were used to measure pain and disability outcomes. RESULTS: Of the 40 patients, 33 (82.5%) did not have surgery; 7 (17.5%) had surgery. Twenty-four of the 33 patients (60%) did not undergo surgery and were followed for 12 months (Comprehensive Pain Management and Rehabilitation, Complete [CPM&R-C]), and 9 (22%) did not have surgery and lacked at least one follow-up evaluation (Comprehensive Pain Management and Rehabilitation, Incomplete [CPM&R-I]). No statistically significant differences were found on baseline measures of strength deficits and SF-36 domains between the CPM&R-C, Surgery, and CPM&R-I groups. Pain and disability scores in the Surgery group were significantly higher than in the CPM&R-C at baseline. There were statistically significant improvements in all areas of strength, pain, and function when comparing measurements at the 12-month follow-up to baseline in the CPM&R-C group. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with motor deficits due to lumbosacral radiculopathy improve over time regardless of treatment choice. Most did not choose surgery, and almost all of these patients regained full strength at 1 year. Strength recovery typically occurred in the first 3 months, but there was ongoing recovery over the course of a year. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

The utility of magnetic resonance imaging results in physician decision-making before initial lumbar spinal injection.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: The need for advanced imaging before spinal intervention is an area of ongoing debate. Many studies have demonstrated the accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) results in evaluating structural pathology in the lumbar spine, but few have addressed how frequently MRI findings change clinical management. A randomized controlled trial showed that viewing MRI results did not impact outcomes in patients with radiculopathy undergoing epidural steroid injection (ESI). The results suggested ESIs that correlated with both imaging and clinical findings experienced slightly more benefit than the blinded cohort, although statistically insignificantly. PURPOSE: Three related studies were conducted to (1) increase understanding of the opinions of interventional spine physicians regarding the utility of viewing imaging before injection and (2) evaluate the impact of viewing MRI results on injection planning (retrospective and prospective analyses). STUDY DESIGN: Survey, prospective, and retrospective analysis. PATIENT SAMPLE: Patients presenting to a university-based spine center for initial evaluation of back or leg pain who were candidates for spinal intervention. OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported measures from a clinical practice questionnaire distributed to interventional spine physicians to determine rates and rationale for utilization of MRI before spine injection, physiologic measures including MRI results, functional measures including physician decision-making regarding type and location of injection performed. METHODS: This study was funded by the University of Colorado Health and Welfare Trust. A survey was sent to interventional spine physicians to assess their utilization of MRI results before spine procedures. A retrospective analysis of patients who were candidates for ESI was conducted to evaluate how initial injection plan compared with the postviewing of MRI results on injection performed. In a prospective analysis, injection plans pre- and post-MRI were compared among patients presenting for initial evaluation of low back or leg pain. RESULTS: Survey responses showed that specialists order MRI studies to correlate with physical exam (91%) and to detect the presence of synovial cysts (68%), whereas tumor/infection (93%) was most likely to cause a change in their approach. In the retrospective review, the physician's planned approach before viewing the MRI was concordant with the actual procedure 49% of the time. A different type of procedure was performed in 15% of planned injections. In such cases, the initial treatment plan was altered (ie, same procedure at a different or additional level or side) in 35% of planned injections. In the prospective data collection, 43% of injections were different from the initial physician decision. The most common reasons for altering the injection was different level affected (36%), facet pathology (22%), and different nerve root affected (16%). CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, MRI before injection frequently changes management decisions in the planning and delivery of lumbar spine injections.

Evidence-informed management of chronic low back pain with adjunctive analgesics.

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.

Core stability exercise principles.

Core stability is essential for proper load balance within the spine, pelvis, and kinetic chain. The so-called core is the group of trunk muscles that surround the spine and abdominal viscera. Abdominal, gluteal, hip girdle, paraspinal, and other muscles work in concert to provide spinal stability. Core stability and its motor control have been shown to be imperative for initiation of functional limb movements, as needed in athletics. Sports medicine practitioners use core strengthening techniques to improve performance and prevent injury. Core strengthening, often called lumbar stabilization, also has been used as a therapeutic exercise treatment regimen for low back pain conditions. This article summarizes the anatomy of the core, the progression of core strengthening, the available evidence for its theoretical construct, and its efficacy in musculoskeletal conditions.

Confirmation of needle placement within the piriformis muscle of a cadaveric specimen using anatomic landmarks and fluoroscopic guidance.

Of patients presenting to pain clinics, complaints are of low back or buttock pain with or without radicular leg symptoms is one of the most common. Piriformis syndrome may be a contributor in up to 8% of these patients. The mainstay of treatment is conservative management with physical therapy, anti-inflammatory medications, muscle relaxants, and correction of biomechanical abnormalities. However, in recalcitrant cases, a piriformis injection of anesthetic and/or corticosteroids may be considered. Because of its small size, proximity to neurovascular structures, and deep location, the piriformis muscle is often injected with the use of commuted tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), ultrasound (US), fluoroscopy, electrical stimulators, or electromyography (EMG). Numerous techniques have been proposed using one or a combination of the above modalities. However, application of these techniques is limited by unavailability of CT, MRI, and EMG equipment as well as a paucity of trained physicians in US-guided procedures in many pain treatment centers throughout the United States. Fluoroscopy, however, is more widely available in this setting. This study utilized a cadaveric specimen to confirm proper needle placement for piriformis or peri-sciatic injection utilizing the previously documented landmarks for fluoroscopic guidance as described by Betts. An anteroposterior of the pelvis with inclusion of the acetabular region of the hip and the inferior aspect of the sacroiliac joint was obtained. The most superior-lateral aspect of the acetabulum and the inferior aspect of the sacroiliac joint were identified. A marker was placed one-third of the distance from the acetabular location to the inferior sacroiliac joint, indicating the target location. A 22-gauge, 3.5-inch spinal needle was directed through the gluteal muscles to the target location using intermittent fluoroscopic guidance. The posterior ileum was contacted and the needle was withdrawn 1 -2 mm. This approach found the needle within the piriformis muscle belly 2 -3 cm lateral to sciatic nerve. The present study was the first study, to our knowledge, that has confirmed the intramuscular position of the needle within the piriformis muscle of a cadaveric specimen using these anatomic landmarks and fluoroscopic guidance.

Systemic effects of epidural steroid injections for spinal stenosis.

This analysis of the lumbar epidural steroid injections for spinal stenosis multicenter randomized controlled trial data identifies the degree of and risk factors for cortisol suppression after epidural steroid injections in older adults with spinal stenosis. Four hundred patients aged 50 years and older with back or leg pain and central lumbar spinal stenosis completed baseline demographic and psychosocial measures. Morning serum cortisol levels were measured at baseline and 3 weeks after initial injection. Patients were randomized to receive epidural injections of either local anesthetic with corticosteroid (n = 200) or local anesthetic only (n = 200). The specific corticosteroid was chosen at the treating physician's discretion (methylprednisolone, betamethasone, triamcinolone, or dexamethasone). Thirty-two patients (20.3%) treated with corticosteroid experienced cortisol reduction at 3 weeks of >50% compared with 10 patients (6.7%) treated with lidocaine only (adjusted treatment effect = 3.5, 95% confidence interval: 1.6-7.9, P = 0.002). The effect on 3-week cortisol changes did not differ by demographic or patient-level characteristics. Those treated with methylprednisolone or triamcinolone had an average 3-week cortisol reduction of 41.0% (P = 0.005) and 41.6% (P < 0.001) from baseline, respectively, whereas patients treated with betamethasone or dexamethasone were not significantly different than comparable patients in the lidocaine arm. The higher rates of cortisol suppression at 3 weeks in those receiving epidural corticosteroid injections, particularly with longer-acting insoluble corticosteroid formulations, are consistent with sustained systemic absorption of corticosteroid.

Descriptive Analysis of Spinal Neuroaxial Injections, Surgical Interventions, and Physical Therapy Utilization for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis Within Medicare Beneficiaries from 2000 to 2011.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective, observational study. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the utilization of various treatment modalities in the management of degenerative spondylolisthesis within Medicare beneficiaries. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis is a condition often identified in symptomatic low back pain. A variety of treatment algorithms including physical therapy and interventional techniques can be used to manage clinically significant degenerative spondylolisthesis. METHODS: This study utilized the 5% national sample of Medicare carrier claims from 2000 through 2011. A cohort of beneficiaries with a new International Classification of Diseases 9th edition (ICD-9) diagnosis code for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis was identified. Current procedural terminology codes were used to identify the number of procedures performed each year by specialty on this cohort. RESULTS: A total of 95,647 individuals were included in the analysis. Average age at the time of initial diagnosis was 72.8 ±â€Š9.8 years. Within this study cohort, spondylolisthesis was more prevalent in females (69%) than males and in Caucasians (88%) than other racial demographics. Over 50% of beneficiaries underwent at least one injection, approximately one-third (37%) participated in physical therapy, one in five (21%) underwent spinal surgery, and one-third (36%) did not utilize any of these interventions. Greater than half of all procedures (124,280/216,088) occurred within 2 years of diagnosis. The ratio of focal interventions (transforaminal and facet interventions) to less selective (interlaminar) procedures was greater for the specialty of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation than for the specialties of Anesthesiology, Interventional Radiology, Neurosurgery, and Orthopedic Surgery. The majority of physical therapy was dedicated to passive treatment modalities and range of motion exercises rather than active strengthening modalities within this cohort. CONCLUSION: Interventional techniques and physical therapy are frequently used treatment modalities for symptomatic degenerative spondylolisthesis. Understanding utilization of these techniques is important to determine relative clinical efficacies and to optimize future health care expenditures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.

Scoping review to develop common data elements for lumbar spinal stenosis.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Common data elements (CDE) represent an important tool for understanding and classifying health outcomes across settings. Although CDEs have been developed for a number of disorders, to date CDEs for lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) have not been fully developed. To facilitate the identification of CDEs and measures to assess them, this technical study leverages the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF), peer-reviewed research, and a panel of experts to identify CDEs specific to LSS. PURPOSE: The study aimed to define CDEs for disease characteristics and outcomes of LSS using the World Health Organization's ICF taxonomy, and to facilitate the selection of assessment instruments for research and clinical care. DESIGN: This is a scoping review using a modified Delphi approach with a technical expert panel composed of clinicians and scientists representing the academia, policy and advocacy stakeholders, and professional associations with expertise in LSS. METHODS: This is a scoping review to identify measures that assess LSS symptoms. Thirty-one subject matter experts (SMEs) prioritized ICF codes and evaluated instruments measuring specific domains. We used a modified Delphi technique to evaluate item-level content and achieve consensus. RESULTS: SMEs prioritized 53 ICF codes; 3 received 100% endorsement, 27 received ≥90% endorsement, whereas the remaining 23 received ≥80% endorsement. Prioritized ICF codes represent diverse domains, including pain, activities and participation, and emotional well-being. The review yielded 58 instruments; we retained 24 for content analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The retained instruments adequately represent the ICFs activities and participation, and body function domains. Body structure and environmental factors were assessed infrequently. Adoption of these CDEs may guide clinical decision making and facilitate comparative effectiveness trials for interventions focused on LSS.

The effect of long-distance bicycling on ulnar and median nerves: an electrophysiologic evaluation of cyclist palsy.

BACKGROUND: Distal ulnar neuropathies have been identified in cyclists because of prolonged grip pressures on handlebars. The so-called cyclist palsy has been postulated to be an entrapment neuropathy of the ulnar nerve in the Guyon canal of the wrist. Previous studies utilizing nerve conduction studies have typically been either case reports or small case series. HYPOTHESIS: Electrophysiologic changes will be present in the ulnar and median nerves after a long-distance multiday cycling event. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: A total of 28 adult hands from 14 subjects underwent median and ulnar motor and sensory nerve conductions, which were performed on both hands before and after a 6-day, 420-mile bike tour. A ride questionnaire was also administered after the ride, evaluating the experience level of the cyclist, equipment issues, hand position, and symptoms during the ride. RESULTS: Distal motor latencies of the deep branch of the ulnar nerve to the first dorsal interosseous were significantly prolonged after the long-distance cycling event. The median motor and sensory studies as well as the ulnar sensory and motor studies of the abductor digiti minimi did not change significantly. Electrophysiologic and symptomatic worsening of carpal tunnel syndrome was observed in 3 hands, with the onset of carpal tunnel syndrome in 1 hand after the ride. CONCLUSION: Long-distance cycling may promote physiologic changes in the deep branch of the ulnar nerve and exacerbate symptoms of carpal tunnel syndrome.