Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
1.
Curr Pain Headache Rep ; 24(3): 5, 2020 Jan 30.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32002687

RESUMO

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Chronic thoracic pain, even though not as prevalent as low back and neck pain, appears in approximately 30% of the general population. The severity of thoracic pain and degree of disability seems to be similar to other painful conditions. Despite this severity, interventions in managing chronic thoracic pain are less frequent, and there is a paucity of literature regarding epidural injections and facet joint interventions. RECENT FINDINGS: As with lumbar and cervical spine, a multitude of interventions are offered in managing chronic thoracic pain, including interventional techniques with epidural injections and facet joint interventions. A single randomized controlled trial (RCT) has been published with a 2-year follow-up of clinical effectiveness of the results. However, there have not been any cost-utility analysis studies pertaining to either epidural injections or facet joint interventions in thoracic pain. Based on the results of the RCT, a cost-utility analysis of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections was undertaken. Evaluation of the cost-utility analysis of thoracic interlaminar epidural injections with or without steroids in managing thoracic disc herniation, thoracic spinal stenosis, and thoracic discogenic or axial pain was assessed in 110 patients with a 2-year follow-up. Direct payment data from 2018 was utilized for procedural costs and indirect costs. Costs, including drug costs, were determined by multiplication of direct procedural payment data by a factor of 1.67 or addition of 40% of cost to accommodate for indirect payments and arrive at overall costs. Cost-utility analysis showed direct procedural cost of USD $1943.19, whereas total estimated costs year per QALY were USD $3245.12.


Assuntos
Anestésicos Locais/economia , Anti-Inflamatórios/economia , Dor nas Costas/tratamento farmacológico , Análise Custo-Benefício , Injeções Epidurais , Adulto , Anestésicos Locais/uso terapêutico , Anti-Inflamatórios/uso terapêutico , Método Duplo-Cego , Quimioterapia Combinada/economia , Quimioterapia Combinada/métodos , Feminino , Humanos , Injeções Epidurais/economia , Injeções Epidurais/métodos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Anos de Vida Ajustados por Qualidade de Vida , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Vértebras Torácicas , Resultado do Tratamento , Articulação Zigapofisária
2.
Curr Pain Headache Rep ; 24(6): 30, 2020 May 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32468418

RESUMO

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The growing prevalence of spinal pain in the USA continues to produce substantial economic impact and strain on health-related quality of life. Percutaneous adhesiolysis is utilized for recalcitrant, resistant conditions involving spinal pain when epidural injections have failed to provide adequate improvement, especially low back and lower extremity pain, specifically in post-lumbar surgery syndrome. Despite multiple publications and systematic reviews, the debate continues in reference to effectiveness, safety, appropriate utilization, and medical necessity of percutaneous adhesiolysis in chronic pain. This systematic review, therefore, was undertaken to evaluate and to update effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis to treat chronic refractory low back and lower extremity pain, post-surgical patients of the lumbar spine. RECENT FINDINGS: From 2009 to 2016, there was a decline of 53.2% utilization of percutaneous adhesiolysis with an annual decline of 10.3% per 100,000 fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare population. Multiple insurers, including Medicare, with Medicare area contractors of Noridian and Palmetto have issued noncoverage policies for percutaneous adhesiolysis resulting in these steep declines and continued noncoverage by Medicare Advantage plans, Managed Care plans of Medicaid, and other insurers. Since 2005, 4 systematic reviews of percutaneous adhesiolysis were published with 3 of them showing proper methodology and appropriate results with effectiveness of adhesiolysis, whereas one poorly performed systematic review showed negative results. In addition, there were only 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to be included in the previous systematic reviews of post-surgery syndrome, whereas now, the RCTs and other studies have increased. This systematic review shows level I or strong evidence for the effectiveness of percutaneous adhesiolysis in managing chronic low back and lower extremity pain related to post-lumbar surgery syndrome.


Assuntos
Dor Crônica/terapia , Dor Lombar/terapia , Extremidade Inferior , Manejo da Dor/métodos , Dor Pós-Operatória/terapia , Dor Crônica/diagnóstico , Humanos , Dor Lombar/diagnóstico , Extremidade Inferior/patologia , Vértebras Lombares , Estudos Observacionais como Assunto/métodos , Dor Pós-Operatória/diagnóstico , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto/métodos , Síndrome , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA