Prevalence of neuropathic pain among patients with chronic low-back pain in the Arabian Gulf Region assessed using the leeds assessment of neuropathic symptoms and signs pain scale

Predictors of neuropathic pain and related functional disability in sciatica patients: a cross-sectional study

PURPOSE

The aim of the present paper was to assess neuropathic pain and its predictors among patients with sciatica. In addition, we sought to investigate the predictors of functional disability in sciatica patients with neuropathic pain.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was carried out on a sample of 100 sciatica patients aged 18 years and older with a radiating pain from the lower back down to the leg below the knee. Information about socio-demographic characteristics, duration of symptoms, being treated or not, type of treatment, side of sciatica, presence of back pain, leg pain occurrence, leg pain intensity, functional disability and pain catastrophizing were collected.

RESULTS

Of the total patients, 57% had neuropathic pain. Multivariable analysis showed that leg pain intensity was higher in the neuropathic pain group as compared to the non-neuropathic pain group. Also, patients with left sciatica were less likely to have neuropathic pain than patients with right sciatica. Patients with neuropathic pain having high levels of pain catastrophizing and being on bed rest for at least one week were at a higher risk of developing functional disability as compared to their counterparts.

CONCLUSION

Low levels of pain catastrophizing and less bed rest should be considered in interventions aimed at improving the functional ability for sciatica patients with neuropathic pain.

Resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging reveals brain remodeling after Tuina therapy in neuropathic pain model

Tuina, a method of traditional Chinese manual manipulation, is an effective alternative therapy for neuropathic pain (NP), but its analgesic mechanism remains unclear. In this study, we used resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging (R-fMRI) to explore the analgesic mechanism of Tuina in an NP rat model. After undergoing surgery to induce chronic compression of the dorsal root ganglion (CCD), one group of rats underwent Tuina at the ipsilateral BL40 acupoint once a day for 10 min during the 25 days following surgery while another group did not. Behavioral tests were performed at baseline, on the third day following surgery, and once a week for the next 4 weeks. R-fMRI was performed at baseline and 7 days and 28 days following surgery. Behavioral testing revealed that the Tuina group presented a significant response improvement to mechanical and thermal nociception stimuli compared to the untreated group 2 weeks following CCD surgery. Interestingly, rats submitted to Tuina presented higher measures of spontaneous neuronal activity in basal forebrain region, primary somatosensory cortex barrel field, dentate gyrus, secondary somatosensory cortex, striatum, descending corticofugal pathways, and globus pallidum of the left hemisphere 4 weeks after the CCD surgery compared to rats having undergone CCD only. In addition, on the 28th day, the ALFF signals of the left dentate gyrus, left secondary somatosensory cortex, left striatum, and bilateral primary cingulate cortex were significantly increased while those in the right dentate gyrus and bilateral periaqueductal gray were significantly decreased compared to those on the 7th day. Correlation analysis showed that the ALFF values of the left descending corticofugal pathways and globus pallidum had a positive correlation with mechanical withdrawal threshold and paw withdrawal thermal latency tests. Altogether, these results indicate that NPP induced by CCD surgery affects the plasticity of the cerebral cortex, and that Tuina alleviate pain behavior by promoting cortical remodeling.

Pregabalin and gabapentin for chronic low back pain without radiculopathy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

 Chronic low back pain (CLBP) is a global health problem, and gabapentin and pregabalin are often used in the treatment of patients without associated radiculopathy or neuropathy. Therefore, determining their efficacy and safety is of enormous value.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the efficacy and safety of using gabapentin and pregabalin for CLBP without radiculopathy or neuropathy.

METHODS

 We performed a search on the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and Web of Science data bases for clinical trials, cohorts, and case-control studies that evaluated patients with CLBP without radiculopathy or neuropathy for at least eight weeks. The data were extracted and inserted into a previously-prepared Microsoft Excel spreadsheet; the outcomes were evaluated using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool, and the quality of evidence, using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.

RESULTS

 Of the 2,230 articles identified, only 5 were included, totaling 242 participants. In them, pregabalin was slightly less efficacious than amitriptyline, the combination of tramadol/acetaminophen, and celecoxib, and pregabalin added to celecoxib showed no benefit when compared to celecoxib alone (very low evidence for all). On the other hand, although one study with gabapentin did not support its use in a general sample of patients with low back pain, another found a reduction in the pain scale and improved mobility (moderate evidence). No serious adverse events were observed in any of the studies.

CONCLUSION

 Quality information to support the use of pregabalin or gabapentin in the treatment of CLBP without radiculopathy or neuropathy is lacking, although results may suggest gabapentin as a viable option. More data is needed to fill this current gap in knowledge.

Diagnosis and Management of Neuropathic Pain in Spine Diseases

Neuropathic pain is generally defined as a non-physiological pain experience caused by damage to the nervous system. It can occur spontaneously, as a reaction to a given stimulus, or independently of its action, leading to unusual pain sensations usually referred to as firing, burning or throbbing. In the course of spine disorders, pain symptoms commonly occur. According to available epidemiological studies, a neuropathic component of pain is often present in patients with spinal diseases, with a frequency ranging from 36% to 55% of patients. Distinguishing between chronic nociceptive pain and neuropathic pain very often remains a challenge. Consequently, neuropathic pain is often underdiagnosed in patients with spinal diseases. In reference to current guidelines for the treatment of neuropathic pain, gabapentin, serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and tricyclic antidepressants constitute first-line therapeutic agents. However, long-term pharmacologic treatment often leads to developing tolerance and resistance to used medications. Therefore, in recent years, a plethora of therapeutic methods for neuropathic pain have been developed and investigated to improve clinical outcomes. In this review, we briefly summarized current knowledge about the pathophysiology and diagnosis of neuropathic pain. Moreover, we described the most effective treatment approaches for neuropathic pain and discussed their relevance in the treatment of spinal pain.

Management of neuropathic pain in patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathy and low back pain in Saudi Arabia: Evidence and gaps

We report existing evidence and gaps in neuropathic pain management in Saudi Arabia, the prevalence and patient management stages in diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN) and low back pain (LBP) with a neuropathic component. A semi-systematic approach was adopted to identify data on neuropathic pain. A structured search was conducted through MEDLINE, Embase, and BIOSIS databases to identify articles published in English between January 2010 and December 2019. Unstructured search was conducted through various sources including Google Scholar and Saudi Arabia's Ministry of Health website. Studies including populations ≥18 years and neuropathic pain were included; data gaps were supplemented with anecdotal data from local experts. Weighted or simple means were calculated for overall data; synthesized evidence was represented as an evidence gap map. Of 37 articles retrieved from structured search, none were eligible for final analyses. Thirteen articles from unstructured search and two anecdotal data sources were included for final analyses. The majority of articles included were of cross-sectional design (n = 10) in diabetes patients. The mean (range; number of articles) DPN prevalence was estimated as 33.6% (5.6%-65.3%; n = 8). Data on DPN patient management stages were limited; synthesized evidence indicated that 37.2% (0.41%-80.0%; n = 3) of patients had DPN awareness, 17.8% (n = 1) underwent screening, 22.4% (18.4%-65.3%; n = 2) had DPN diagnosis, and 45.1% (0.0%-62.7%; n = 2) received treatment for pain management. Data on LBP with neuropathic component were scarce (prevalence, 41.0% [n = 1]; diagnosis, 54.7% [n = 1]). Data are limited, so more studies are needed to accurately estimate the prevalence and stages of patient management for neuropathic pain in the country.

Effectiveness, safety and tolerability of nabiximols oromucosal spray versus typical oral long-acting opioid analgesics in patients with severe neuropathic back pain: analysis of 6-month real-world data from the German Pain e-Registry

Objective

To compare the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of add-on nabiximols (NBX) oromucosal spray vs typical oral long-acting opioid (LAO) analgesics in patients with severe (± chronic) peripheral neuropathic back pain poorly responsive to other treatments.

Methods

Retrospective analysis of anonymized, propensity score–matched data from the German Pain e-Registry of adult outpatients who initiated NBX or LAO between March 2017 and March 2020.

Results

Data were analyzed from propensity score–matched patients treated with NBX (n = 655) or LAO (n = 655): mean age ≈51 years; 57% female; mean pain duration ≈2.6 years; chronic pain 61%; severe dysfunctional pain 93%. At 6 months, NBX was noninferior to LAO for overall symptom relief, based on the least-squares mean difference between cohorts in change from baseline in patient-reported, pain-related aggregated nine-item scale scores (−27.84%; 95% confidence interval [CI] −29.71 to −25.96; P < 0.001) and individual pain-related scale scores. Subsequent prespecified superiority analysis of the primary endpoint showed that NBX was superior to LAO: all secondary endpoints measuring symptoms of pain and physical function improved significantly with NBX and LAO, with between-group differences favoring NBX (all P < 0.001). Fewer patients treated with NBX than LAO experienced treatment-related adverse events (25.5% vs 76.0%; P < 0.001) or discontinued treatment because of treatment-related adverse events (7.9% vs 29.3%; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Within study limitations (e.g., observational design, all potential biases), add-on NBX was superior to and better tolerated than add-on treatment with typical oral LAO analgesics in patients with neuropathic back pain inadequately controlled by recommended/established systemic therapies.

Sensory descriptors which identify neuropathic pain mechanisms in low back pain: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Descriptors provided by patients with neuropathic low back pain (NLBP) with or without spinally referred leg pain are frequently used by clinicians to help to identify the predominant pain mechanisms. Indeed, many neuropathic screening tools are primarily based on subjective descriptors to determine the presence of neuropathic pain. There is a need to systematically review and analyse the existing evidence to determine the validity of such descriptors in this cohort.

METHODS

Ten databases were systematically searched. The review adhered to PRISMA and CRD guidelines and included a risk of bias assessment using QUADAS-2. Studies were included if they contained symptom descriptors from a group of NLBP patients +/- leg pain. Studies had to include a reference test to identity neuropathic pain from other pain mechanisms.

RESULTS

Eight studies of 3099 NLBP patients were included. Allodynia and numbness were found to discriminate between NLBP and nociceptive LBP in four studies. Autonomic dysfunction, (changes in the colour or appearance of the skin), was also found to discriminate between the groups in two studies. Dysesthesia identified NLBP in 5/7 respectively. Results from studies were equivocal regarding pain described as hot/burning cold and paroxysmal pain in people with NLBP.

CONCLUSION

Subjectively reported allodynia and numbness would suggest a neuropathic pain mechanism in LBP. Dysesthesia would raise the suspicion of NLBP. More research is needed to determine if descriptors suggesting autonomic dysfunction can identify NLBP. There is poor consensus on whether other descriptors can identify NLBP.

The Experiences of People Living with Peripheral Neuropathy in Kuwait-A Process Map of the Patient Journey

Peripheral neuropathy is a neurological disease characterised by pain, numbness, tingling, swelling or muscle weakness due to nerve damage, caused by multiple factors such as trauma, infections and metabolic diseases such as diabetes. In Kuwait 54% of the diabetic population, has peripheral neuropathy. In this exploratory, qualitative study conducted in Kuwait, 25 subjects with peripheral neuropathy took part in one-on-one, semi-structured interviews lasting 45–60 min. Interviews were transcribed, translated into English and coded using NVivo 12. Four individual patient journeys were mapped out in detail, then compared and condensed into a single process map. The remaining 21 interviews were then reviewed to ensure the final map represented all patient journeys. Participants reported similar healthcare pathways for their peripheral neuropathy and faced various difficulties including lack of psychological support, administrative issues (long waiting referral periods, loss of medical documents, shortage of specialists and lack of centralized electronic medical records) and inadequate medical care (shortage of new treatments and deficient follow-ups). Mapping the patient journey in Kuwait showed similar pharmacological treatment to UK guidelines, except that some medicines were unavailable. The map also indicated the need for an integrated referral approach, the use of technology for electronic medical recording and report transmission, alongside education on self-management, coping mechanisms and treatment options for people living with peripheral neuropathy.

The neuropathic pain component among patients with chronic low back-radicular pain

OBJECTIVES

Determining neuropathic pain component (NPC) among patients with chronic low back pain-radicular pain (CLBP-RP) and the adjustment between scales of neuropathic pain.

MATERIAL-METHODS

One hundred and one patients with CLBP-RP were included in the study. The severity of CLBP-RP was evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS). The Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions (DN4) and Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs Scales (LANSS) were used to evaluate the NPC.

RESULTS

The mean score of CLBP-RP assessed by VAS was 80 mm. NPC was detected a rate of 65.3% by DN4 and 40.6% by LANSS. NPC was 75.4% in females and 47.2% in males according to DN4, and 52.3% in females and 19.4% in males according to LANSS. The female gender, occupation, and VAS scores were determined to be significant factors contributing to presence of NPC according to logistic regression analyses (p< 0.01, p< 0.05, p< 0.05). A medium degree accordance was established between DN4 and LANSS scales according to kappa coefficient (Kappa = 0.532, p< 0.05).

CONCLUSION

CLBP is among the diseases causing mixed type pain accompanied by nociceptive and neuropathic pain. NPC was detected in a considerable part of patients with radicular pain. Identifying the character of radicular pain is significant to develop proper management strategies.

Pharmacological target therapy of neuropathic pain and patient-reported outcomes in patients with chronic low back pain in Korea: Results from the NLBP Outcomes Research

A number of studies have demonstrated an association of neuropathic pain and chronic low back pain (CLBP), but the outcome difference in each medical management is poorly understood. This study is aimed to investigate treatment patterns of neuropathic pain in CLBP patients and to explore patient-reported outcomes (PROs) including quality of life (QoL) and functional disability by treatment patterns.Data were extracted from the neuropathic low back pain (NLBP) outcomes research. It was a multicenter and cross-sectional study in which 1200 patients were enrolled at 27 general hospitals, from 2014 to 2015. Of total, 478 patients classified as neuropathic pain were used for this subgroup analysis. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to treatment patterns (with vs. without the targeted therapy [TT] of neuropathic pain). Demographic and clinical features were collected by chart reviews and PROs were measured by patient's survey. QoL was assessed by EuroQoL 5-dimension (EQ-5D) questionnaire. Functional disability was measured by the Quebec Back Pain Disability Scale (QBPDS). Multiple linear regression analyses were conducted to compare the PROs between TT group and non-targeted therapy (nTT) group.Among the NLBP patients (mean age 63years, female 62%), EQ-5D index, EuroQoL-Visual Analog Scale (EQ-VAS), and QBPDS Scores (mean ± standard deviation) were 0.40 ± 0.28, 54.98 ± 19.98, and 46.03 ± 21.24, respectively. Only 142 (29.7%) patients had pharmacological TT of neuropathic pain. Univariate analyses revealed no significant mean differences between TT group and nTT group in the EQ-5D index (0.41 ± 0.27 and 0.39 ± 0.28), EQ-VAS (56.43 ± 18.17 and 54.37 ± 20.69), and QBPDS (45.31 ± 21.32 and 46.31 ± 21.24). After adjustment with covariates, TT group had higher scores of EQ-5D index (β = 0.07; P < 0.01) and EQ-VAS (β = 4.59; P < 0.05) than the nTT group. The TT group's QBPDS score was lower than the nTT group, although its statistical significance still has not been reached (β = -4.13; P = 0.07).We found that considerable proportion of the NLBP patients remains untreated or undertreated. Although TT group had significantly better QoL than nTT group, only 29.7% of NLBP patients had pharmacological TT. Therefore, clinicians should consider using TT for better QoL of neuropathic pain patients.

Testing the validity and reliability of the Arabic version of the painDETECT questionnaire in the assessment of neuropathic pain

Introduction

Neuropathic pain (NP) can cause substantial suffering and, therefore, it must be diagnosed and treated promptly. Diagnosis of NP can be difficult and if made by an expert pain physician is considered the gold standard, however where expert help may not be easily available, screening tools for NP can be used. The painDETECT questionnaire (PD-Q) is a simple screening tool and has been widely used in several languages. We developed an Arabic version of PD-Q and tested its validity and reliability.

Methods

The original PD-Q was translated into the Arabic language by a team of experts. The translated version of the PD-Q was administered to the study population, which included patients having moderate to severe pain for at least three months. Reliability of the Arabic version was evaluated by an intra-class-correlation coefficient (ICC) between pre- and post-measures and Cronbach’s α values. Validity was measured by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Expert pain physician diagnosis was considered as the gold standard for comparing the diagnostic accuracy.

Results

A total of 375 patients were included in the study, of which 153 (40.8%) patients were diagnosed with NP and 222 [59.2%] patients had nociceptive pain. The ICC between pre- and post-PD-Q scale total scores for the overall sample, NP group, and NocP group was 0.970 (95% CI, 0.964–0.976), 0.963 (95% CI, 0.949–0.973), and 0.962 (95% CI, 0.951–0.971), respectively. The Cronbach’s α values for the post-assessment measures in the overall sample, NP group, and nociceptive pain group, were 0.764, 0.684, and 0.746, respectively. The area under the ROC curve was 0.775 (95% CI, 0.725–0.825) for the PD-Q total score.

Conclusion

The Arabic version of the PD-Q showed good reliability and validity in the detection of NP component in patients with chronic pain.

Validity and reliability of Arabic version of the ID Pain screening questionnaire in the assessment of neuropathic pain

Diagnosis of neuropathic pain (NP) can be challenging. The ID Pain (ID-P) questionnaire, a screening tool for NP, has been used widely both in the original version and translated forms. The aim of this study was to develop an Arabic version of ID-P and assess its validity and reliability in detecting neuropathic pain. The original ID-P was translated in Arabic language and administered to the study population. Reliability of the Arabic version was evaluated by percentage observed agreement, and Cohen’s kappa; and validity by sensitivity, specificity, correctly classified, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Physician diagnosis was considered as the gold standard for comparing the diagnostic accuracy. The study included 375 adult patients (153 [40.8%] with NP; 222 [59.2%] with nociceptive pain). Overall observed percentage agreement and Cohen’s kappa were >90% and >0.80, respectively. Median (range) score of ID-P scale was 3 (2–4) and 1 (0–2) in the NP group and NocP group, respectively (p<0.001). Area under the ROC curve was 0.808 (95% CI, 0.764–0.851). For the cut-off value of ≥2, sensitivity was 84.3%, specificity was 66.7%, and correct classification was 73.9%. Thus, the Arabic version of ID-P showed moderate reliability and validity as a pain assessment tool. This article presents the psychometric properties of the Arabic version of ID Pain questionnaire. This Arabic version may serve as a simple yet important screening tool, and help in appropriate management of neuropathic pain, specifically in primary care centers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Classification and Treatment of Chronic Neck Pain: A Longitudinal Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Neck pain exerts a steep personal and socioeconomic toll, ranking as the fourth leading cause of disability. The principal determinant in treatment decisions is whether pain is neuropathic or nonneuropathic, as this affects treatment at all levels. Yet, no study has sought to classify neck pain in this manner.

METHODS

One hundred participants referred to an urban, academic military treatment facility with a primary diagnosis of neck pain were enrolled and followed up for 6 months. Pain was classified as neuropathic, possible neuropathic, or nonneuropathic using painDETECT and as neuropathic, mixed, or nociceptive by s-LANSS (self-completed Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs pain scale) and physician designation. Based on previous studies, the intermediate possible neuropathic pain category was considered to be a mixed condition. The final classification was based on a metric combining all 3 systems, slightly weighted toward physician's judgment, which is considered the reference standard.

RESULTS

Fifty percent of participants were classified as having possible neuropathic pain, 43% as having nonneuropathic pain, and 7% with primarily neuropathic pain. Concordance was high between the various classification schemes, ranging from a low of 62% between painDETECT and physician designation for possible neuropathic pain, to 83% concordance between s-LANSS and the 2 other systems for neuropathic pain. Individuals with neuropathic pain reported higher levels of baseline disability, were more likely to have a coexisting psychiatric illness, and underwent surgery more frequently than other pain categories, but were also more likely to report greater reductions in disability after 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Although pure neuropathic pain comprised a small percentage of our cohort, 50% of our population consisted of mixed pain conditions containing a possible neuropathic component. There was significant overlap between the various classification schemes.

Prospective clinical observational study evaluating gender-associated differences of preoperative pain intensity

Previous studies reported conflicting results concerning different pain perceptions of men and women. Recent research found higher pain levels in men after major surgery, contrasted by women after minor procedures. This trial investigates differences in self-reported preoperative pain intensity between genders before surgery.Patients were enrolled in 2011 and 2012 presenting for preoperative evaluation at the anesthesiological assessment clinic at Charité University hospital. Out of 5102 patients completing a computer-assisted self-assessment, 3042 surgical patients with any preoperative pain were included into this prospective observational clinical study. Preoperative pain intensity (0-100 VAS, visual analog scale) was evaluated integrating psychological cofactors into analysis.Women reported higher preoperative pain intensity than men with median VAS scores of 30 (25th-75th percentiles: 10-52) versus 21 (10-46) (P < 0.001). Adjusted multiple regression analysis showed that female gender remained statistically significantly associated with higher pain intensity (P < 0.001). Gender differences were consistent across several subgroups especially with varying patterns in elderly. Women scheduled for minor and moderate surgical procedures showed largest differences in overall pain compared to men.This large clinical study observed significantly higher preoperative pain intensity in female surgical patients. This gender difference was larger in the elderly potentially contradicting the current hypothesis of a primary sex-hormone derived effect. The observed variability in specific patient subgroups may help to explain heterogeneous findings of previous studies.

Epidural steroids for spinal pain and radiculopathy: a narrative, evidence-based review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are the most commonly performed intervention in pain clinics across the USA and worldwide. In light of the growing use of ESIs, a recent spate of highly publicized infectious complications, and increasing emphasis on cost-effectiveness, the utility of ESI has recently come under intense scrutiny. This article provides an evidence-based review of ESIs, including the most up-to-date information on patient selection, comparison of techniques, efficacy, and complications.

RECENT FINDINGS

The data strongly suggest that ESIs can provide short-term relief of radicular symptoms but are less convincing for long-term relief, and mixed regarding cost-effectiveness. Although some assert that transforaminal ESIs are more efficacious than interlaminar ESIs, and that fluoroscopy can improve treatment outcomes, the evidence to support these assertions is limited.

SUMMARY

The cost-effectiveness of ESI is the subject of great debate, and similar to efficacy, the conclusions one draws appear to be influenced by specialty. Because of the wide disparities regarding indications and utilization, it is likely that indiscriminate use is cost-ineffective, but that judicious use in well-selected patients can decrease healthcare utilization. More research is needed to better refine selection criteria for ESI, and to determine which approach, what dose, and how many injections are optimal.

Effect of depression and neuropathic pain using questionnaires on quality of life in patients with low back pain; cross-sectional retrospective study

PURPOSE

The present study investigated the percentage of low back pain (LBP) patients who have depressive symptoms and neuropathic pain and analyzed the effects of these on the quality of life (QOL) in these patients.

METHODS

Of the 650 new patients with LBP that visited the hospital between June 2012 and December 2013, 309 patients who completed questionnaires to assess LBP and QOL were included in the study. The questionnaire included demographic items, the self-rated depression scale (SDS)-Zung, the Japanese version of the PainDETECT questionnaire (PDQ-J), numerical pain rating scale (NRS), and QOL assessments. The patients were divided into two groups according to their SDS-Zung scores: a nondepressed group with SDS scores <40 and a depressed group with SDS-Zung scores ≥50.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-five patients (40.5 %) were classified as nondepressed and 63 (20.4 %) as depressed. The mean PDQ-J score was higher in depressed patients than in nondepressed patients. The frequency of neuropathic pain was greater in depressed patients, with neuropathic pain observed in 17 of the 63 (27 %) depressed LBP patients and 11 of the 125 (9 %) nondepressed LBP patients. The SDS-Zung and PDQ-J scores of LBP patients were correlated significantly (r = 0.261, p < 0.001). Depressed patients had higher pain NRS scores and lower QOL scores compared with nondepressed patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the depressed patients and those with neuropathic LBP had a higher level of pain, greater pain-related disability, and poorer QOL compared with nondepressed patients. This is the first study to use the SDS-Zung and PDQ-J screening questionnaires to estimate the presence of neuropathic pain associated with depressive symptoms in LBP patients and to evaluate the impact of these on QOL.

Diagnostic Accuracy of the Slump Test for Identifying Neuropathic Pain in the Lower Limb

STUDY DESIGN

Diagnostic accuracy study with nonconsecutive enrollment.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the diagnostic accuracy of the slump test for neuropathic pain (NeP) in those with low to moderate levels of chronic low back pain (LBP), and to determine whether accuracy of the slump test improves by adding anatomical or qualitative pain descriptors.

BACKGROUND

Neuropathic pain has been linked with poor outcomes, likely due to inadequate diagnosis, which precludes treatment specific for NeP. Current diagnostic approaches are time consuming or lack accuracy.

METHODS

A convenience sample of 21 individuals with LBP, with or without radiating leg pain, was recruited. A standardized neurosensory examination was used to determine the reference diagnosis for NeP. Afterward, the slump test was administered to all participants. Reports of pain location and quality produced during the slump test were recorded.

RESULTS

The neurosensory examination designated 11 of the 21 participants with LBP/sciatica as having NeP. The slump test displayed high sensitivity (0.91), moderate specificity (0.70), a positive likelihood ratio of 3.03, and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.13. Adding the criterion of pain below the knee significantly increased specificity to 1.00 (positive likelihood ratio = 11.9). Pain-quality descriptors did not improve diagnostic accuracy.

CONCLUSION

The slump test was highly sensitive in identifying NeP within the study sample. Adding a pain-location criterion improved specificity. Combining the diagnostic outcomes was very effective in identifying all those without NeP and half of those with NeP. Limitations arising from the small and narrow spectrum of participants with LBP/sciatica sampled within the study prevent application of the findings to a wider population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnosis, level 4-.

Epidural steroid injections compared with gabapentin for lumbosacral radicular pain: multicenter randomized double blind comparative efficacy study

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether an epidural steroid injection or gabapentin is a better treatment for lumbosacral radiculopathy.

DESIGN

A multicenter randomized study conducted between 2011 and 2014. Computer generated randomization was stratified by site. Patients and evaluating physicians were blinded to treatment outcomes.

SETTINGS

Eight military, Veterans Administration, and civilian hospitals.

PARTICIPANTS

145 people with lumbosacral radicular pain secondary to herniated disc or spinal stenosis for less than four years in duration and in whom leg pain is as severe or more severe than back pain.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants received either epidural steroid injection plus placebo pills or sham injection plus gabapentin.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Average leg pain one and three months after the injection on a 0-10 numerical rating scale. A positive outcome was defined as a ≥ 2 point decrease in leg pain coupled with a positive global perceived effect. All patients had one month follow-up visits; patients whose condition improved remained blinded for their three month visit.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences for the primary outcome measure at one month (mean pain score 3.3 (SD 2.6) and mean change from baseline -2.2 (SD 2.4) in epidural steroid injection group versus 3.7 (SD 2.6) and -1.7 (SD 2.6) in gabapentin group; adjusted difference 0.4, 95% confidence interval -0.3 to 1.2; P=0.25) and three months (mean pain score 3.4 (SD 2.7) and mean change from baseline -2.0 (SD 2.6) versus 3.7 (SD 2.8) and -1.6 (SD 2.7), respectively; adjusted difference 0.3, -0.5 to 1.2; P=0.43). Among secondary outcomes, one month after treatment those who received epidural steroid injection had greater reductions in worst leg pain (-3.0, SD 2.8) than those treated with gabapentin (-2.0, SD 2.9; P=0.04) and were more likely to experience a positive successful outcome (66% v 46%; number needed to treat=5.0, 95% confidence interval 2.8 to 27.0; P=0.02). At three months, there were no significant differences between treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Although epidural steroid injection might provide greater benefit than gabapentin for some outcome measures, the differences are modest and are transient for most people.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01495923.

Epidural steroid injections: an updated review on recent trends in safety and complications

SUMMARY 

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs), which can provide significant but temporary pain relief in well-selected patients, are the most commonly performed procedure in pain management. The anatomy of the epidural space provides a framework for understanding risks associated with ESIs, a topic relevant to both patients and physicians in interventional pain, surgery and primary care. Safety considerations of epidural steroids include drug preparation and myriad physiological effects stemming from steroid exposure. Although major complications associated with ESI occur rarely, potentially catastrophic events resulting from infectious, hematologic and neurologic morbidity may lead to permanent injury. The safety profile of ESIs may improve with development and dissemination of sound injection technique, safer compounds manufactured in a sterile manner and deficient of thromboembolic potential and the application of existing technology.

Diagnosis and pharmacologic management of neuropathic pain among patients with chronic low back pain

Chronic low back pain consists of both nociceptive and neuropathic mechanisms and can be classified as a mixed pain syndrome. Neuropathic component of chronic low back pain has often been under-recognized and under-treated by the physicians. Recent studies have demonstrated that approximately 20%-55% of chronic low back pain patients have neuropathic pain symptoms. An altered peripheral, spinal, and supraspinal processing of pain arising as a result of a lesion affecting the nerves system are the major contributor to neuropathic low back pain. The clinical evaluation is still the gold standard for assessment and diagnosis of neuropathic low back pain. Although diagnosis can be difficult due to the lack of reliable gold standard diagnostic test for neuropathic low back pain, screening tools may help non-specialists, in particular, to identify potential patients with neuropathic low back pain who require further diagnostic evaluation and pain management. Several screening tools for neuropathic pain have been developed and tested with different patient populations. Among the screening tools, the painDETECT questionnaire and the Standardized Evaluation of Pain are validated in patients with low back pain. The Standardized Evaluation of Pain may lead to more effective in discriminating between neuropathic and nociceptive pain in patients with low back pain according to the higher rate of sensitivity and its validity in patients with low back pain. However, the most appropriate approach is still to combine findings on physical and neurologic examinations and patient’s report in distinguishing neuropathic pain from nociceptive pain. The clinical examination including bedside sensory tests is still the best available tool for assessment and diagnosis neuropathic pain among patients with chronic low back pain. Due to the fact that chronic low back pain consists of both nociceptive and neuropathic mechanisms, a multimodal treatment approach is more rational in the management of patients with chronic low back pain. Therefore, combination therapy including drugs with different mechanisms of action should be given to the patients with chronic low back pain.

Epidural steroid injection in korean pain physicians: a national survey

Background

Epidural steroid injection (ESI) is one of the most common procedures for patients presenting low back pain and radiculopathy. However, there is no clear consensus on what constitutes appropriate steroid use for ESIs. To investigate optimal steroid injection methods for ESIs, surveys were sent to all academic pain centers and selected private practices in Korea via e-mail.

Methods

Among 173 pain centers which requested the public health insurance reimbursements for their ESIs and were enrolled in the Korean Pain Society, 122 completed questionnaires were returned, for a rate of 70.5%; also returned were surveys from 39 academic programs and 85 private practices with response rates of 83.0% and 65.9%, respectively.

Results

More than half (55%) of Korean pain physicians used dexamethasone for ESIs. The minimum interval of subsequent ESIs at the academic institutions (3.1 weeks) and the private practices (2.1 weeks) were statistically different (P = 0.01).

Conclusions

Although there was a wide range of variation, there were no significant differences between the academic institutions and the private practices in terms of the types and single doses of steroids for ESIs, the annual dose of steroids, or the limitations of doses in the event of diabetes, with the exception of the minimum interval before the subsequent ESI.

Epidural steroids: a comprehensive, evidence-based review

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are the most widely utilized pain management procedure in the world, their use supported by more than 45 placebo-controlled studies and dozens of systematic reviews. Despite the extensive literature on the subject, there continues to be considerable controversy surrounding their safety and efficacy. The results of clinical trials and review articles are heavily influenced by specialty, with those done by interventional pain physicians more likely to yield positive findings. Overall, more than half of controlled studies have demonstrated positive findings, suggesting a modest effect size lasting less than 3 months in well-selected individuals. Transforaminal injections are more likely to yield positive results than interlaminar or caudal injections, and subgroup analyses indicate a slightly greater likelihood for a positive response for lumbar herniated disk, compared with spinal stenosis or axial spinal pain. Other factors that may increase the likelihood of a positive outcome in clinical trials include the use of a nonepidural (eg, intramuscular) control group, higher volumes in the treatment group, and the use of depo-steroid. Serious complications are rare following ESIs, provided proper precautions are taken. Although there are no clinical trials comparing different numbers of injections, guidelines suggest that the number of injections should be tailored to individual response, rather than a set series. Most subgroup analyses of controlled studies show no difference in surgical rates between ESI and control patients; however, randomized studies conducted by spine surgeons, in surgically amenable patients with standardized operative criteria, indicate that in some patients the strategic use of ESI may prevent surgery.

Back complaints in older adults: prevalence of neuropathic pain and its characteristics

OBJECTIVE

Neuropathic symptoms are reported in 16-55.6% of patients with back pain. Studies were performed in various populations; however, none focused on older adults. The aim of the study was to assess prevalence of neuropathic pain in older adults with back pain.

METHODS

Prevalence of neuropathic pain, measured with the Dolour Neuropathique en 4 questions (DN4), was assessed in the Back Complaints in the Elders study (Netherlands). Patients (>55 years) consulting their general practitioner with a new episode of back complaints were included. Two DN4-versions were used: one based on interview plus physical examination, the other based on interview alone. In the interview plus physical examination version, patients' and complaint characteristics were compared between groups with different scores (0, 1, 2, 3, and ≥4). The DN4 interview-version compared patients with negative and positive scores.

RESULTS

Of the 261 included patients available for analysis were 250 patients (95.8%) with the DN4 interview plus physical examination, and 259 patients (99.2%) with the DN4 interview. In DN4 interview plus physical examination (N = 250), five patients (2%) scored positive (score ≥4). Higher score was associated with pain radiating below the knee (P < 0.001) and use of paracetamol (P = 0.02). In DN4 interview (N = 259), 29 (11.2%) patients scored positive (score ≥3). Positive score was associated with higher body mass index (P = 0.01), pain radiating below the knee (P = 0.001), and use of paracetamol (P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

In older adults with back pain presenting with a new episode in primary care, prevalence of neuropathic pain is low and seems to be associated with pain radiating below the knee, use of paracetamol, and higher body mass index.

The costs and consequences of adequately managed chronic non-cancer pain and chronic neuropathic pain

BACKGROUND

Chronic pain is distressing for patients and a burden on healthcare systems and society. Recent research demonstrates different aspects of the negative impact of chronic pain and the positive impact of successful treatment, making an overview of the costs and consequences of chronic pain appropriate.

OBJECTIVE

To examine recent literature on chronic noncancer and neuropathic pain prevalence, impact on quality and quantity of life, societal and healthcare costs, and impact of successful therapy.

METHODS

Systematic reviews (1999 to February 2012) following PRISMA guidelines were conducted to identify studies reporting appropriate outcomes.

RESULTS

Chronic pain has a weighted average prevalence in adults of 20%; 7% have neuropathic pain, and 7% have severe pain. Chronic pain impeded activities of daily living, work and work efficiency, and reduced quality and quantity of life. Effective pain therapy (pain intensity reduction of at least 50%) resulted in consistent improvements in fatigue, sleep, depression, quality of life, and work.

CONCLUSION

Strenuous efforts should be put into obtaining good levels of pain relief for people in chronic pain, including the opportunity for multiple drug switching, using reliable, validated, and relatively easily applied patient-centered outcomes. Detailed, thoughtful and informed decision analytic policy modeling would help understand the key elements in organizational change or service reengineering to plan the optimum pain management strategy to maximize pain relief and its stream of benefits against budgetary and other constraints. This paper contains the information on which such models can be based.

Prevalence of chronic pain among Libyan adults in Derna City: a pilot study to assess the reliability, linguistic validity, and feasibility of using an Arabic version of the structured telephone interviews questionnaire on chronic pain

There are few studies estimating the prevalence of chronic pain in countries from the Middle East. We translated the Structured Telephone Interviews Questionnaire on Chronic Pain from English into Arabic and assessed its reliability and linguistic validity before using it in a telephone survey in Libya to gather preliminary prevalence data for chronic pain. Intraclass correlations for scaled items were high, and there were no differences in answers to nominal items between the first and second completions of the questionnaire. One hundred and 4 individuals participated in a telephone survey. The prevalence of chronic pain was 25.0% (95% CI, 16.7% to 33.3%) and 50.0% (95% CI: 30.8% to 69.2) of the participants with chronic pain scored ≥ 12 on the Arabic S-LANSS. Mean ± SD duration of pain was 2.8 ± 1.2 years, and pain was more frequent in women (P = 0.02). 53.8% of participants had taken prescription medication for their pain, and 76.9% had used nondrug methods of treatment including traditional Libyan methods such as Kamara, a local herbal concoction. Eighty percent believed that their doctor would rather treat their illness than their pain, and 35% reported that their doctor did not think that their pain was a problem. Some participants complained that the questionnaire was too long with a mean ± SD call duration of 20 ± 5.4 minutes. We conclude that the Arabic Structured Telephone Interviews Questionnaire on Chronic Pain was reliable and linguistically valid and could be used in a large-scale telephone survey on the Libyan population. Our preliminary estimate of prevalence should be considered with caution because of the small sample size.

Prevalence of neuropathic features of back pain in clinical populations: implications for the diagnostic triage paradigm

SUMMARY Contemporary clinical assessment of back pain is based on the diagnostic triage paradigm. The most common diagnostic classification is nonspecific back pain, considered to be of nociceptive etiology. A small proportion are diagnosed with radicular pain, of neuropathic origin. In this study we review the body of literature on the prevalence of neuropathic features of back pain, revealing that the point prevalence is 17% in primary care, 34% in mixed clinical settings and 53% in tertiary care. There is evidence that neuropathic features of back pain are not restricted to typical clinical radicular pain phenotypes and may be under-recognized, particularly in primary care. The consequence of this is that in the clinic, diagnostic triage may erroneously classify patients with nonspecific back pain or radicular pain. A promising alternative is the development of mechanism-based pain phenotyping in patients with back pain. Timely identification of contributory pain mechanisms may enable greater opportunity to select appropriate therapeutic targets and improve patient outcomes.

Epidural steroid injections

Epidural steroid injection (ESI) is the most commonly performed intervention in pain clinics across the United States. This article provides an evidence-based review of ESI, including data on efficacy, patient selection, comparison of types, and complications. The data strongly suggest that ESI can provide short-term relief for radicular symptoms but are less compelling for long-term effects or relief of back pain. Although it has been asserted that transforaminal ESIs are more efficacious than interlaminar injections, the evidence supporting this is limited.