Articles: low-back-pain.
-
Observational Study
Unravelling the Left-Right Judgment Task in Chronic Low Back Pain: Insights through Behavioural, Electrophysiological, Motor Imagery, and Bodily Disruption Perspectives.
Bodily disruptions have been consistently demonstrated in individuals with chronic low back pain. The performance on the left-right judgment task has been purposed as an indirect measure of the cortical proprioceptive representation of the body. It has been suggested to be dependent on implicit motor imagery, although the available evidence is conflicting. ⋯ The absence of differences in the reaction times for the left-right judgment task between both groups, along with inconsistencies in self-reported and quantitative sensory testing data, could question the involvement of implicit motor imagery in solving the task. In conclusion, our results suggest disrupted attentional processing in participants with chronic low back pain to solve the left-right judgment task. PERSPECTIVE: Although there are no differences in the performance of the left-right judgment task (hits, reaction times) between chronic low back pain patients and controls, the analysis of event-related potentials revealed that patients require a higher cognitive load, measured by N1 peak amplitude.
-
Curr Pain Headache Rep · Jul 2024
Review Comparative StudyComparison of the Efficacy of Different Radiofrequency Techniques for the Treatment of Lumbar Facet Joint Pain: Combined with Anatomy.
Lumbar facet pain is generally considered to be one of the major causes of chronic low back pain. Each lumbar facet joint is innervated by the medial branch of the posterior spinal nerve from its own level and above. Radiofrequency (RF) of the medial branch of the posterior branch of the spinal nerve is an effective method for the treatment of lumbar facet pain. RF technology is diverse, including traditional radiofrequency (TRF), pulsed radiofrequency (PRF), cooled radiofrequency (CRF), low-temperature plasma radiofrequency ablation (CA), and other treatment methods. The purpose of this paper is to compare the efficacy of different radiofrequency techniques and to analyze the reasons for this in the context of anatomy. ⋯ There have been studies confirming the differences in efficacy of different RF techniques. However, most of the studies only compared two RF techniques, not four techniques, TRF, CRF, PRF, and CA, and did not analyze the reasons for the differences in efficacy. This article reviews the differences in the efficacy of the above four RF techniques, clarifies that the differences are mainly due to the inability to precisely localize the medial branch of the posterior branch of the spinal nerve, analyzes the reasons for the inability to precisely localize the posterior branch of the spinal nerve in conjunction with anatomy, and proposes that the development of RF technology for lumbar facet pain requires more in-depth anatomical, imaging, and clinical studies.
-
The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane (ESP) block and compare with the conventional physical therapy in chronic low back pain (LBP). ⋯ US-guided ESP block might be considered a successful, safe, and technically simple alternative treatment in patients with chronic LBP to control pain and reduce the cost of physical therapy and lost workdays.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Five-Year Longitudinal Follow-up of Restorative Neurostimulation Shows Durability of Effectiveness in Patients With Refractory Chronic Low Back Pain Associated With Multifidus Muscle Dysfunction.
Adults with refractory, mechanical chronic low back pain associated with impaired neuromuscular control of the lumbar multifidus muscle have few treatment options that provide long-term clinical benefit. This study hypothesized that restorative neurostimulation, a rehabilitative treatment that activates the lumbar multifidus muscles to overcome underlying dysfunction, is safe and provides relevant and durable clinical benefit to patients with this specific etiology. ⋯ The Clinicaltrials.gov registration number for the study is NCT02577354; registration date: October 15, 2016; principal investigator: Christopher Gilligan, MD, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. The study was conducted in Australia (Broadmeadow, New South Wales; Noosa Heads, Queensland; Welland, South Australia; Clayton, Victoria), Belgium (Sint-Niklaas; Wilrijk), The Netherlands (Rotterdam), UK (Leeds, London, Middlesbrough), and USA (La Jolla, CA; Santa Monica, CA; Aurora, CO; Carmel, IN; Indianapolis, IN; Kansas City, KS; Boston, MA; Royal Oak, MI; Durham, NC; Winston-Salem, NC; Cleveland, OH; Providence, RI; Spartanburg, SC; Spokane, WA; Charleston, WV).