Dataset Information

Diagnosing Discogenic Low Back Pain Associated with Degenerative Disc Disease Using a Medical Interview.

ABSTRACT:

Purposes

To evaluate the usefulness of our original five questions in a medical interview for diagnosing discogenic low back pain (LBP), and to establish a support tool for diagnosing discogenic LBP.

Materials and methods

The degenerative disc disease (DDD) group (n = 42) comprised patients diagnosed with discogenic LBP associated with DDD, on the basis of magnetic resonance imaging findings and response to analgesic discography (discoblock). The control group (n = 30) comprised patients with LBP due to a reason other than DDD. We selected patients from those who had been diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis and had undergone decompression surgery without fusion. Of them, those whose postoperative LBP was significantly decreased were included in the control group. We asked patients in both groups whether they experienced LBP after sitting too long, while standing after sitting too long, squirming in a chair after sitting too long, while washing one's face, and in the standing position with flexion. We analyzed the usefulness of our five questions for diagnosing discogenic LBP, and performed receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis to develop a diagnostic support tool.

Results

There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, except age, between the groups. There were significant differences between the groups for all five questions. In the age-adjusted analyses, the odds ratios of LBP after sitting too long, while standing after sitting too long, squirming in a chair after sitting too long, while washing one's face, and in standing position with flexion were 10.5, 8.5, 4.0, 10.8, and 11.8, respectively. The integer scores were 11, 9, 4, 11, and 12, respectively, and the sum of the points of the five scores ranged from 0 to 47. Results of the ROC analysis were as follows: cut-off value, 31 points; area under the curve, 0.92302; sensitivity, 100%; and specificity, 71.4%.

Conclusions

All five questions were useful for diagnosing discogenic LBP. We established the scoring system as a support tool for diagnosing discogenic LBP.

SUBMITTER: Tonosu J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5098755 | biostudies-literature | 2016

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Diagnosing Discogenic Low Back Pain Associated with Degenerative Disc Disease Using a Medical Interview.

Tonosu Juichi J Inanami Hirohiko H Oka Hiroyuki H Katsuhira Junji J Takano Yuichi Y Koga Hisashi H Yuzawa Yohei Y Shiboi Ryutaro R Oshima Yasushi Y Baba Satoshi S Tanaka Sakae S Matsudaira Ko K

PloS one 20161107 11

<h4>Purposes</h4>To evaluate the usefulness of our original five questions in a medical interview for diagnosing discogenic low back pain (LBP), and to establish a support tool for diagnosing discogenic LBP.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>The degenerative disc disease (DDD) group (n = 42) comprised patients diagnosed with discogenic LBP associated with DDD, on the basis of magnetic resonance imaging findings and response to analgesic discography (discoblock). The control group (n = 30) comprised p ...[more]

PMID: 27820861

Similar Datasets

Project description:Discogenic low back pain (DLBP) is considered the most common type of chronic low back pain (CLBP). Sinuvertebral nerve block (SVNB) is a rapid and precise intervention performed under local anesthesia to treat DLBP induced CLBP. Thus, in this study, we aimed to explore the clinical efficacy of SVNB for DLBP. We retrospectively included 32 DLBP patients from July 2020 and April 2021. Inclusion criteria: The patients had chronic pain, diagnosed as single-segment disc degeneration induced DLBP, and suffered from one-year ineffective conservative treatment. SVNB was performed and the patients were followed up at 3 and 7 days, and at 1 and 3 months after SVNB. The basic clinical characteristics, including age and gender, were collected. The measurements of Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) were assessed. The average age was 49.31±14.37 years, and females vs. males was 20 (62.50%) vs. 12 (37.50%). The preoperative VAS and ODI score were 5.75±1.41 and 32.59±21.56, respectively. The VAS score was reduced to 2.50±1.46, 2.63±1.60, 3.53±2.17, and 3.78±2.18 at 3 and 7 days, and 1 and 3 months after SVNB, respectively (P<0.05). The improvement rates in the VAS score were 56.52%, 54.34%, 38.61%, and 34.26% at 3 and 7 days, and 1 and 3 months after SVNB, respectively. 18 patients (56.25%) experienced varying degrees of pain recurrence within 3 months. The ODI score was reduced by 17.28±13.06, 16.84±13.51, 19.63±17.12, and 21.44±19.03 points at 3, 7 days and 1, 3 months after SVNB, respectively (P<0.05). At 3 day and 3 month after SVNB, the ODI scores of 22 patients (68.75%) and 20 patients (62.50%) decreased to ≤20, respectively. The ODI improvement rates were 46.98%, 48.33%, 39.80%, and 34.24% at 3, 7 days and 1, 3 months after SVNB, respectively. We conducted a retrospective study of the clinical efficacy of SVNB for DLBP. As a rapid and cost-effective minimally invasive treatment, SVNB provided some assistance for the short-term pain relief and physical functional improvement of DLBP. SVNB could be a good choice for the treatment of DLBP.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy of surgery with disc prosthesis versus non-surgical treatment for patients with chronic low back pain.DesignA prospective randomised multicentre study.SettingFive university hospitals in Norway.Participants173 patients with a history of low back pain for at least one year, Oswestry disability index of at least 30 points, and degenerative changes in one or two lower lumbar spine levels (86 patients randomised to surgery). Patients were treated from April 2004 to September 2007.InterventionsSurgery with disc prosthesis or outpatient multidisciplinary rehabilitation for 12-15 days.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome measure was the score on the Oswestry disability index after two years. Secondary outcome measures were low back pain, satisfaction with life (SF-36 and EuroQol EQ-5D), Hopkins symptom check list (HSCL-25), fear avoidance beliefs (FABQ), self efficacy beliefs for pain, work status, and patients' satisfaction and drug use. A blinded independent observer evaluated scores on the back performance scale and Prolo scale at two year follow-up.ResultsThe study was powered to detect a difference of 10 points on the Oswestry disability index between the groups at two years. At two years there was a mean difference of -8.4 points (95% confidence interval -13.2 to -3.6) in favour of surgery. In the analysis of prespecified secondary outcomes, there were significant differences in favour of surgery for low back pain (mean difference -12.2, -21.3 to -3.1), patients' satisfaction (63% (n = 46) v 39% (n = 26)), SF-36 physical component score (mean difference 5.8, 2.5 to 9.1), self efficacy for pain (mean difference 1.0, 0.2 to 1.9), and the Prolo scale (mean difference 0.9, 0.1 to 1.6). There were no significant differences in return to work, SF-36 mental component score, EQ-5D, fear avoidance beliefs, Hopkins symptom check list, drug use, and the back performance scale. One serious complication of leg amputation occurred during surgical revision of a polyethylene dislodgement. The drop-out rate was 20% (34) and the crossover rate was 6% (5).ConclusionsSurgical intervention with disc prosthesis for chronic low back pain resulted in a significantly greater improvement in the Oswestry score compared with rehabilitation, but this improvement did not clearly exceed the prespecified minimally important clinical difference between groups of 10 points, and the data are consistent with a wide range of differences between the groups, including values well below 10 points. The potential risks of surgery and the substantial amount of improvement experienced by a sizeable proportion of the rehabilitation group also have to be incorporated into overall decision making. Trial registration NCT 00394732.

Project description:BackgroundLittle information is available on vertebral motion in patients with discogenic low back pain under physiological conditions. We previously validated a combined dual fluoroscopic and magnetic resonance imaging system to investigate in vivo lumbar kinematics. The purpose of the present study was to characterize mechanical dysfunction among patients with confirmed discogenic low back pain, relative to asymptomatic controls without degenerative disc disease, by quantifying abnormal vertebral motion.MethodsTen subjects were recruited for the present study. All patients had discogenic low back pain confirmed clinically and radiographically at L4-L5 and L5-S1. Motions were reproduced with use of the combined imaging technique during flexion-extension, left-to-right bending, and left-to-right twisting movements. From local coordinate systems at the end plates, relative motions of the cephalad vertebrae with respect to caudad vertebrae were calculated at each of the segments from L2 to S1. Range of motion of the primary rotations and coupled translations and rotations were determined.ResultsDuring all three movements, the greatest range of motion was observed at L3-L4. L3-L4 had significantly greater motion than L2-L3 with left-right bending and left-right twisting movements (p < 0.05). The least motion occurred at L5-S1 for all movements; the motion at this level was significantly smaller than that at L3-L4 (p < 0.05). Range of motion during left-right bending and left-right twisting at L3-L4 was significantly larger in the degenerative disc disease group than in the normal group. The range of motion at L4-L5 was significantly larger in the degenerative group than in the normal group during flexion; however, the ranges of motion in both groups were similar during left-to-right bending and left-to-right twisting.ConclusionsThe greatest range of motion in patients with discogenic back pain was observed at L3-L4; this motion was greater than that in normal subjects, suggesting that superior adjacent levels developed segmental hypermobility prior to undergoing fusion. L5-S1 had the least motion, suggesting that segmental hypomobility ensues at this level in patients with discogenic low back pain.

Dataset Information

Diagnosing Discogenic Low Back Pain Associated with Degenerative Disc Disease Using a Medical Interview.

Purposes

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Diagnosing Discogenic Low Back Pain Associated with Degenerative Disc Disease Using a Medical Interview.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets