Thinking about Epidural Steroids for Sciatica ? Think again !
Sciatica refers to pain that radiates along the path of the sciatic nerve — which branches from your lower back through your hips and buttocks and down each leg. Typically, sciatica affects only one side of your body. Sciatica most commonly occurs when a herniated disk or a bone spur on the spine compresses part of the nerve. This causes inflammation, pain and often some numbness in the affected leg. According to numerous studies, epidural corticosteroids injections for sciatica are costly and ineffective, and at best provide short term pain relief.
Our approach at the clinic is to integrate evidence based therapeutics: Acupuncture to control pain and inflammation, chiropractic to restore mobility to hypomobile segments, physical therapy to strengthen core muscles, and improve movements, Custom Orthotics to correct abnormal gait, prolotherapy to support and strengthen laxed ligaments or unstable joints, and functional medicine to enhance optimal biochemistry and physiology to the patient.
Efficacy of epidural steroid injections for low-back pain and sciatica: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials.
The purpose of the study was to assess the efficacy of epidural steroid injections for low-back pain. Data was obtained using computer-aided search of published randomized clinical trials and assessment of the methods of the studies. Twelve randomized clinical trials evaluating epidural steroid injections were identified. Data was extracted based on scores for quality of the methods, using 4 categories (study population, interventions, effect measurement, and data presentation and analysis) and the conclusion of the author(s) with regard to the efficacy of epidural steroid injections. Method scores of the trials ranged from 17 to 72 points (maximum 100 points). Eight trials showed method scores of 50 points or more. Of the 4 best studies (> 60 points), 2 reported positive outcomes and 2 reported negative results. Overall, 6 studies indicated that the epidural steroid injection was more effective than the reference treatment and 6 reported it to be no better or worse than the reference treatment. There appeared to be no relationship between the methodological quality of the trials and reported outcomes. In conclusion, there are flaws in the design of most studies. The best studies showed inconsistent results of epidural steroid injections. The efficacy of epidural steroid injections has not been established. The benefits of epidural steroid injections, if any, seem to be of short duration only. Future research efforts are warranted, but more attention should be paid to the methods of the trials.
Cost-effectiveness and safety of epidural steroids in the management of sciatica.
OBJECTIVES:
To investigate the clinical effectiveness of epidural steroid injections (ESIs) in the treatment of sciatica with an adequately powered study and to identify potential predictors of response to ESIs. Also, to investigate the safety and cost-effectiveness of lumbar ESIs in patients with sciatica.
DESIGN:
A pragmatic, prospective, multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial with 12-month follow-up was performed. Patients were stratified according to acute (<4 months since onset) versus chronic (4-18 months) presentation. All analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis with last observation carried forward used to impute missing data.
PARTICIPANTS:
Total of 228 patients listed for ESI with clinically diagnosed unilateral sciatica, aged between 18 and 70 years, who had a duration of symptoms between 4 weeks and 18 months.
INTERVENTIONS:
Patients received up to three injections of epidural steroid and local anaesthetic (active), or an injection of normal saline into the interspinous ligament (placebo).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:
The primary outcome measure was the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ); measures of pain relief and psychological and physical function were collected. Health economic data on return to work, analgesia use and other interventions were also measured. Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated using the SF-6D, calculated from the Short Form (SF-36). Costs per patient were derived from figures supplied by the centres’ finance departments and a costings exercise performed as part of the study. A cost-utility analysis was performed using the SF-36 to calculate costs per QALY.
CONCLUSIONS:
Although ESIs appear relatively safe, it was found that they confer only transient benefit in symptoms and self-reported function in a small group of patients with sciatica at substantial costs. ESIs do not provide good value for money if NICE recommendations are followed. Additional research is suggested into the epidemiology of radicular pain, producing a register of all ESIs, possible subgroups who may benefit from ESIs, the use of radiological imaging, optimal early interventions, analgesic agents and nerve root injections, the use of cognitive behavioural therapy in rehabilitation, improved methods of assessment, a comparative cost-utility analysis between various treatment strategies, and methods to reduce the effect of scarring and inflammation.
###
Book An
Appointment Now
Click below to get started and schedule your appointment online.
More Posts
Categories
Tags
BOOK YOUR APPOINTMENT
Click below to get started and schedule your appointment online.