Prospective Evaluation of Pain Flares and Time Until Pain Relief Following Musculoskeletal Corticosteroid Injections

A Study on the Effectiveness of Musculoskeletal Corticosteroid Injections for Reducing Patient Symptom Scores in Primary Care Practice

OBJECTIVES

To present data on the effectiveness of corticosteroid injections (CSI) in reducing symptom scores for musculoskeletal conditions in patients treated in an NHS primary care CSI service. The data will also examine whether adding local anaesthetic to the corticosteroid preparation affects the overall patient outcomes in symptom scores.

METHODS

A Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaire was used to collect data. Patients were asked to complete the questionnaire post-CSI. Patients were asked to rate their symptoms on a score of 0-6 before and after their injection. Data were calculated using standard deviation and paired t-test to assess the effectiveness of CSI in reducing symptom scores.

RESULTS

Overall, 172 patients (79.6%) reported an improvement in symptomatology post CSI. Improvements were seen across all injection sites. Of those taking medication for their symptoms, 73 patients (55.7%) reported that they were able to reduce their medication. Data did not suggest that adding local anaesthetic to the injectate resulted in better patient outcomes. Post-injection symptom scores were statistically similar across all clinicians.

CONCLUSION

83.7% of patients experienced a reduction in symptom scores post injection. Adding lidocaine to the injectate preparation did not result in any statistically significant improvement in patient outcome. Over half of the participants were able to reduce their medication post injection, which demonstrates this is a highly effective primary care service for treatment/management of some MSK conditions.

Safety outcomes and improvement in pain scores after radiologist-performed fluoroscopy-guided interlaminar cervical epidural steroid injection

INTRODUCTION

Image-guided spine injections are an important tool in the management of patients with a variety of spinal pathologies. Our practice offers radiologist-performed fluoroscopy-guided interlaminar cervical epidural steroid injection (ESI) routinely performed in the outpatient setting. The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and improvement in pain scores after radiologist-performed cervical ESI.

METHODS

An institutional database was used to retrospectively identify cervical injections performed between October 2016 and October 2022. All injections were performed at the C7-T1 level utilizing 1.0 mL of 10 mg/mL dexamethasone without epidural anesthetic. The Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) was used to assess pain improvement. Cervical MRI was reviewed to assess pre-injection cervical disease severity. Patient charts were reviewed for any post-injection complications.

RESULTS

A total of 251 cervical injections in 186 patients met our inclusion criteria with mean clinical follow up of 28.5 months (range 0.2 - 73.0 months). No patients experienced any major complications after injection. Post-injection pain scores were available for 218 of 251 injections (86.9%) with mean follow-up of 11.8 days (range 6 - 57 days). There was a significant improvement in pain scores from a mean pre-injection NRS score of 5.2/10 to 3.0/10 (p < .0001). 117 patients (53.7%) reported ≥ 50% improvement after injection. Patients who had prior injection were more likely to report ≥ 50% pain improvement after subsequent injection (p = .012).

CONCLUSION

Radiologist-performed fluoroscopy-guided interlaminar cervical ESI at the C7-T1 level is a safe and effective tool in the management of patients with cervical pathology.

Pain Management Strategies in Osteoarthritis

Pain is the major symptom of osteoarthritis (OA) and is an important factor in strategies to manage this disease. However, the current standard of care does not provide satisfactory pain relief for many patients. The pathophysiology of OA is complex, and its presentation as a clinical syndrome is associated with the pathologies of multiple joint tissues. Treatment options are generally classified as pharmacologic, nonpharmacologic, surgical, and complementary and/or alternative, typically used in combination to achieve optimal results. The goals of treatment are the alleviation of symptoms and improvement in functional status. Several studies are exploring various directions for OA pain management, including tissue regeneration techniques, personalized medicine, and targeted drug therapies. The aim of the present narrative review is to extensively describe all the treatments available in the current practice, further describing the most important innovative therapies. Advancements in understanding the molecular and genetic aspects of osteoarthritis may lead to more effective and tailored treatment approaches in the future.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Systemic Adverse Effects and Complications of Ultrasound- and Fluoroscopy-Guided Glucocorticoid Injections: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

The aims of the study are to assess the incidence of systemic adverse effects and complications of ultrasound-guided and fluoroscopy-guided glucocorticoid injections and to identify associated risk factors.

DESIGN

This retrospective cohort study compared participants who received a glucocorticoid injection at the outpatient clinic and participants who had an appointment but did not receive a glucocorticoid injection. Participants were called to verify whether they had experienced any of the predetermined systemic adverse effects and complications. Multiple binary logistic regression was used to identify systemic adverse effect and complication risk factors.

RESULTS

There were 1010 participants in the glucocorticoid injection group and 328 in the nonglucocorticoid injection group. There was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence of systemic infection and decompensated heart failure between the two groups. More participants in the glucocorticoid injection group developed abnormal uterine bleeding and erectile dysfunction, but the differences did not reach statistical significance. Female participants were 1.9 times more likely to develop systemic adverse effects ( P < 0.001). Younger age ( P < 0.001), diabetes ( P = 0.012), and higher glucocorticoid injection doses ( P = 0.024) were also associated with an increased risk of developing systemic adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Identified risk factors for developing glucocorticoid injection systemic adverse effects were younger age, female sex, diabetes, tobacco use, and high glucocorticoid injection doses.

Comparison of triamcinolone and methylprednisolone efficacy and steroid flare reaction rates after shoulder corticosteroid injection: a prospective interrupted time series study

BACKGROUND

A corticosteroid flare reaction is a well-described phenomenon that causes significant pain and dysfunction. The paucity of literature impedes decision making regarding which corticosteroid to use for shoulder injection. The purpose of this study was to compare methylprednisolone acetate (MPA) and triamcinolone acetonide (TA) injections in the glenohumeral joint and/or subacromial space in terms of efficacy and the incidence of steroid flare reactions.

METHODS

In this prospective, interrupted time series, parallel study, patients received injections in the glenohumeral joint and/or subacromial space. MPA and TA were used during 2 discrete 3-month periods. The injections consisted of 2 mL of lidocaine, 2 mL of bupivacaine, and 80 mg of either MPA or TA. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores were recorded immediately before injection; 1-7 days after injection; and 3, 6, and 12 months after injection. The primary outcome was the incidence of a steroid flare reaction, defined as a post-injection increase in the VAS score by ≥2 points. The secondary outcome was injection failure, defined as a post-injection VAS score greater than the baseline score or the need for another intervention. We used linear mixed models with a patient-level random intercept to identify the mean VAS score change for TA injections in the first week after injection.

RESULTS

MPA or TA shoulder injections were administered in 421 patients; of these patients, 15 received bilateral-joint injections whereas 406 received a single-joint injection, for a total of 436 injections (209 MPA and 227 TA injections). Pain scores in the first week after injection were available for 193 MPA and 199 TA injections. Significantly more patients in the MPA cohort reported flare reactions compared with the TA cohort (22.8% vs. 4.0%, P < .001) during the first week after injection. In the first week after injection, the mean VAS score of patients receiving TA injections was 1.05 (95% confidence interval, 0.47-1.63) lower than that of patients receiving MPA injections when adjusted for age, sex, race, pain type, surgeon type, and injection site. At 3 months, surveys for 169 MPA and 172 TA injections were completed, with no significant difference in the rate of injection failure for MPA vs. TA (42.6% vs. 36.1%, P = .224). Treatment failure rates were significantly higher for MPA than for TA at 6 months (78.44% vs. 62.5%, P < .001) but not at 12 months (81.18% vs. 81.42%, P = .531.) CONCLUSION: TA injections resulted in a >5-fold reduction in steroid flare reactions, with statistically superior 6-month efficacy rates, compared with MPA injections. This study supports TA as a more viable corticosteroid option for shoulder injection.

Summary Report of the Arthritis Foundation and the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society's Symposium on Targets for Osteoarthritis Research: Part 1: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, and Current Imaging Approaches

This first of a 2-part series of articles recounts the key points presented in a collaborative symposium sponsored jointly by the Arthritis Foundation and the American Orthopaedic Foot & Ankle Society with the intent to survey the state of scientific knowledge related to incidence, diagnosis, pathologic mechanisms, and injection treatment options for osteoarthritis (OA) of the foot and ankle. A meeting was held virtually on December 3, 2021. A group of experts were invited to present brief synopses of the current state of knowledge and research in this area. Part 1 overviews areas of epidemiology and pathophysiology, current approaches in imaging, diagnostic and therapeutic injections, and genetics. Opportunities for future research are discussed. The OA scientific community, including funding agencies, academia, industry, and regulatory agencies, must recognize the needs of patients that suffer from arthritis of foot and ankle. The foot and ankle contain a myriad of interrelated joints and tissues that together provide a critical functionality. When this functionality is compromised by OA, significant disability results, yet the foot and ankle are generally understudied by the research community. Level of Evidence: Level V - Review Article/Expert Opinion.