Spinal Injections

Spinal pain is a common complaint and cause of disability in the United States, affecting most individuals at some point in their lives. The complex anatomy of the spine leads to multiple potential and coexisting etiologies for pain, and the differentiation of these sources can present a diagnostic challenge. Image-guided spinal injections can provide both diagnostic information identifying pain location as well as prolonged therapeutic relief as an alternative to medical management. Anesthetic and corticosteroid medications can be administered within the epidural space through transforaminal or interlaminar approaches, blocking various sensory nerves, or directly within the facet joints. Proceduralists must be aware of associated patient considerations, techniques, and potential complications to perform the procedures safely. We discuss image-guided spinal injection techniques, based on best practices and our experiences.

Comparison of Pain Location and Extent Between Adults with Ankylosing Spondylitis-related Inflammatory versus Chronic Nonspecific Low Back Pain

Introduction: Pain among adults with ankylosing spondylitis-related inflammatory low back pain (AS-ILBP) is not well-characterized, and individuals with AS-ILBP are frequently misdiagnosed with chronic nonspecific low back pain (CNSLBP). This study digitally quantifies and compares the location and extent of pain between adults with AS-ILBP and those with CNSLBP and examines the relationship between the pain extent and functional, psychological, and condition-specific factors in those with AS-ILBP. Methodology: The location and extent of pain in adults with AS-ILBP (n = 27) or CNSLBP (n = 22) was quantified using a digital pain drawing analysis. Relationships between pain extent and perceived pain intensity and disability, pain-related cognitive factors (back beliefs, fear of movement, pain catastrophizing, pain coping, and self-efficacy), psychological distress, and AS-specific features were examined in those with AS-ILBP. Result: Pain extent in the dorsal region of the body was greater in those with AS-ILBP than in CNSLBP (P < 0.05). In AS-ILBP, the most prevalent pain location was the lumbar region (88.9%), followed by the buttock (70.4%); the frequencies of reported pain in these regions were similar between groups (P > 0.05). The AS-ILBP group more frequently reported pain in the thoracic (70.4%) and cervical (51.8%) regions (P < 0.05). In the AS-ILBP group, larger pain extent was moderately associated with negative back beliefs (rs = –0.44 to –0.41, P < 0.05) and lower self-efficacy (rs = –0.58 to –0.42, P < 0.05), but not with any of functional outcomes. Larger pain extent was associated with higher disease activity (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Adults with AS-ILBP perceive larger pain extent in spinal regions and the degree of pain extent is associated with negative back beliefs, lower self-efficacy, and higher disease activity. Pain drawings may assist in the differential diagnosis of CNSLBP and AS-ILBP. Further, they may aid psychological screening in adults with AS-ILBP.

The Symmetry of Lower Back Pain as a Potential Screening Factor for Serious Pathology: A Survey Study

Background: Pain maps provide reliable information on pain location in various conditions. This study explored the feasibility of pain maps as a screening tools for serious underlying conditions. The pain symmetry was evaluated as the possible distinguishing feature. Methods: A Web-based survey on the correlation of pain-related disability and pain pattern was developed. Respondents with lower back pain were asked to mark the exact location of their pain over the pain chart. The symmetry index was calculated and used to divide subjects into two groups that were then compared in terms of the prevalence of red flags for serious pathologies, as well as the pain-related disability measured with COMI and ODI instruments. Results: Of the 4213 respondents who completed the survey, 1018 were included in the study. The pain related disability was greater in respondents with asymmetrical pain patterns, as shown with all instruments. The distribution of red flags was also dependent on pain symmetry. The history of weight loss (6.70 vs. 1.76 p < 0.001) and fever (4.91 vs. 2.14 p < 0.001) were more prevalent with symmetrical pain patterns, and the history of trauma was more frequent with asymmetrical pain (21.41 vs. 10.71 p < 0.001). Conclusions: It was shown that the symmetry of pain is correlated to the prevalence of red flags and pain-related disability.

Pain in German physiotherapists: an analysis of pain prevalence and analgesics intake

Background Healthcare professionals of different occupations report pain, in particular back pain. It is known that the handling of patients and standing for long periods of time – like physiotherapists do, as well as working in bent posture – are causes of back pain. A high prevalence of low back pain (LBP) in German physiotherapists is to be expected. Objective To determine pain point prevalence, severity of pain, type of pain (acute, chronic, recurrent), most affected body locations and extent of analgesics intake in German physiotherapists. Method This was a nationwide online survey with German physiotherapists. Univariable and multivariable methods were applied to identify associations between sociodemographic variables and pain, type of pain and pain location as well as analgesic intake by type of pain. In addition, severity of pain by type was examined using the Kruska-Wallis Test. Results A total of 550 physiotherapists were included in the analysis. Prevalence of pain was 63.09 % (acute: 4.18 %, chronic: 15.27 %, recurrent: 43.64 %). Most frequently mentioned pain locations were lumbar spine (49.27 %), cervical spine (48.39 %) and head (40.47 %). Participants with chronic pain reported a higher pain severity than physiotherapists with recurrent pain. Analgesics were used by 35.29 % of study participants with pain. Participants with chronic pain indicated a significantly higher probability of using analgesics compared to physiotherapists with recurrent pain. Conclusion This study indicates a high prevalence of pain and analgesics intake in participating physiotherapists. Therefore, measures are needed to reduce pain in German physiotherapists.

Pain in the temple? Headache, muscle pain or both: A retrospective analysis

Aim Headache attributed to temporomandibular disorders and myalgia are two diagnoses included in the diagnostic criteria for temporomandibular disorders (DC/TMD). However, it is not clear if these two diagnoses are different clinical entities given their similar presentation and way in which they are diagnosed, when the myalgia is within the temporalis muscle. The purpose of this retrospective study was to assess the overlap between headache attributed to temporomandibular disorders and myalgia of the temporalis muscle. Methods The charts of 671 patients seeking treatment at the Section of Orofacial Pain and Jaw Function, Aarhus University, Denmark, between January 2015 and February 2020 were screened for a diagnosis of headache attributed to temporomandibular disorders, myalgia of the temporalis muscle, or both. Results A total of 89 patients fulfilled the DC/TMD criteria for either headache attributed to TMD, myalgia of the temporalis or both. Of these, two had a diagnosis of headache attributed to TMD, 16 of myalgia of the temporalis, and 71 were diagnosed with both. In 97.3% of the times that headache attributed to temporomandibular disorders was diagnosed, the patient was also diagnosed with myalgia of the temporalis. The Jaccard index was 0.8, indicating a substantial overlap between the two diagnoses. Finally, the overlap of pain location between the two diagnoses was substantial, with a Jaccard index of 0.9. Conclusions In the present study, headache attributed to temporomandibular disorders was almost exclusively diagnosed together with myalgia of the temporalis. Therefore, we propose that headache attributed to temporomandibular disorders and myalgia of the temporalis muscle have more clinical similarities than differences and as such could be considered one single clinical entity. Further studies will be needed to address the clinical consequences of this proposal.

POS1278 THE PREVALENCE AND CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF ULTRASONOGRAPHIC FINDINGS OF DISTAL MEDIAL HAMSTRING TENDONS IN PATIENTS WITH POSTEROMEDIAL KNEE PAIN

Background:Periarticular abnormalities are common ultrasonographic (U/S) findings in individuals with knee pain. Incidental U/S observations, including thickening of the distal hamstring tendons, require explanations for their clinical importance. Tendon thickness may be a good indicator of tendinopathy and tendon dysfunction. Also, it is uncertain whether these tendon changes are correlated with knee pain or not?Objectives:The aim of this study was to determine U/S findings of distal medial hamstring tendons in patients with posteromedial (PM) knee pain and assess the diagnostic values of tendon thickness in predicting tendinopathy.Methods:We studied distal medial hamstring tendons (semimembranosus [SM] and semitendinosus [ST]) of 104 patients (104 knees) with non-traumatic unilateral PM knee pain and 118 healthy controls (236 knees). U/S evaluations included tendon thickness, echogenicity, the presence of intrasubstance tears, calcification, and vascularity.Results:The mean age (standard deviation) of the patients and control groups were 51.7 (10.4) years and 49.8 (9.9) years, respectively. The mean visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain among patients was 5.1 and 58.6% of them located the pain at medial joint line. The studied patients had significantly higher mean SM thickness (7.17 mm vs. 5.46 mm, respectively) and ST thickness (3.93 mm vs. 3.45 mm, respectively) than the controls. U/S abnormalities among patients were hypoechogenicity (62.5%), intrasubstance tears (31.7%), loss of fibrillar pattern (23.1%), Baker cyst (20.2%), calcification (18.3%), Anserine bursitis (11.5%), and neovascularization (6.7%). We found significant correlations between tendon thickness and VAS (r=0.752, p=0.004), and pain location (r=0.680, p=0.008). SM thickness had higher accuracy to predict tendinopathy than ST thickness (80.6% vs. 68.9%, respectively).Table 1.Diagnostic values of tendon thickness in predicting tendinopathy.TendonsCutoffSensitivitySpecificity+PV-PVAccuracyAUCSM>6.670.289.885.776.880.60.835ST>3.756.779.671.167.668.90.696SM: semimembranosus, ST: semitendinosus, +PV: positive predictive value, -PV: negative predictive value, AUC: area under curve.Conclusion:U/S changes are frequently present in patients with PM knee pain. Tendon thickness is an accurate predictor of tendinopathy. These findings suggest that U/S screening of all individuals with PM knee pain is a useful tool for improving patients’ outcomes and decreasing tendon-related disability.Disclosure of Interests:None declared

Recovery trajectories in common musculoskeletal complaints by diagnosis contra prognostic phenotypes

Background There are large variations in symptoms and prognostic factors among patients sharing the same musculoskeletal (MSK) diagnosis, making traditional diagnostic labelling not very helpful in informing treatment or prognosis. Recently, we identified five MSK phenotypes across common MSK pain locations through latent class analysis (LCA). The aim of this study was to explore the one-year recovery trajectories for pain and functional limitations in the phenotypes and describe these in relation to the course of traditional diagnostic MSK groups. Methods We conducted a longitudinal observational study of 147 patients with neck, back, shoulder or complex pain in primary health care physiotherapy. Data on pain intensity and function were collected at baseline (week 0) and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12, 26 and 52 weeks of follow up using web-based questionnaires and mobile text messages. Recovery trajectories were described separately for the traditional diagnostic MSK groups based on pain location and the same patients categorized in phenotype groups based on prognostic factors shared among the MSK diagnostic groups. Results There was a general improvement in function throughout the year of follow-up for the MSK groups, while there was a more modest decrease for pain intensity. The MSK diagnoses were dispersed across all five phenotypes, where the phenotypes showed clearly different trajectories for recovery and course of symptoms over 12 months follow-up. This variation was not captured by the single trajectory for site specific MSK diagnoses. Conclusion Prognostic subgrouping revealed more diverse patterns in pain and function recovery over 1 year than observed in the same patients classified by traditional diagnostic groups and may better reflect the diversity in recovery of common MSK disorders.