Pain physician
-
It is widely believed that the extent of a patient's subjective complaints are often based on developmental, psychological, social, and cultural factors rather than structural or physical pathology. In patients presenting with chronic low back pain, underlying behavioral problems may not be immediately apparent. These behavioral or non-physiological issues may be secondary to a deliberate deception or may be associated with psychological distress. ⋯ Results showed that 27 patients (22%) presented with non-physiological symptoms, 34 patients (28%) with non-physiological signs, and 19 patients (16%) with combined presence of non-physiological signs and symptoms. Overall there was significant correlation of non-physiological signs with depression, anxiety, and somatization, both by diagnosis of depression, diagnosis of anxiety and elevated scores. However, correlation was present for non-physiological symptoms only with elevated scores of anxiety and somatization.
-
The purpose of this current opinion on sacroiliac joint pain and dysfunction is to assist interventional pain physicians to apply appropriate treatment decisions and rationale to their patients in pain. Discussion of relevant scientific data and controversial positions will be provided. ⋯ Discussion will provoke support or criticism of the relevant scientific data, and general recommendations for interventional pain management physicians should be considered within the context of the individual practitioners skill and practice patterns. Current Opinion is not intended to provide a standard of care.
-
The precise cause of low back pain based on clinical history, physical examination, radiological imaging, and electrophysiological testing can be identified in only 15% of patients in the absence of disc herniation and neurological deficit. The prevalence of chronic lumbar zygapophysial (facet) joint pain ranges from 15% to 45% utilizing comparative local anesthetic blocks in controlled settings in accordance with the criteria established by the International Association for the Study of Pain. Currently, facet joint injection procedures are considered as the gold standard in the diagnosis of facet joint pain. ⋯ Since we are unable to apply reference standards of biopsy, surgery, or autopsy, and pain relief has been argued as an inconsistent feature, long-term follow-up has been considered as the best indicator. This study was undertaken to evaluate stability of the diagnosis of lumbar facet joint pain following comparative local anesthetic blocks at a follow-up after 2 years. The results showed that 85% of the patients available for follow-up withstood the diagnosis of facet joint pain at the end of 2 years, whereas this proportion decreased to 75%, if all the patients in the study were included in the analysis.
-
The majority of the provocative tests described for physical examination of the neck and cervical spine relate to identification of radiculopathy, spinal cord, or brachial plexus pathology. These tests are often performed routinely by many providers with variable methods and interpreted in a variety of ways. Several commonly performed provocative tests include Spurling's Neck Compression Test, Shoulder Abduction (Relief) Test, Neck Distraction Test, L'hermitte's Sign, Hoffmann's Sign and Adson's Test. ⋯ For Hoffman's Sign, the existing literature does not address interexaminer reliability but appears to indicate fair sensitivity and fair to good specificity. For L'hermitte's Sign and Adson's Test, not even tentative statements can be made with regard to interexaminer reliability, sensitivity, and specificity, based on the existing literature. It is concluded that more research is indicated to understand the clinical utility of all the provocative tests employed in the physical examination of the neck and cervical spine.
-
Evidence-based practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the management of chronic spinal pain are systematically developed and professionally derived statements and recommendations that assist both physicians and patients in making decisions about appropriate health care in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic or persistent pain. The guidelines were developed utilizing an evidence-based approach to increase patient access to treatment, to improve outcomes and appropriateness of care, and to optimize cost-effectiveness. All types of relevant and published evidence and consensus were utilized. ⋯ It is expected that a provider will establish a plan of care on a case-by-case basis, taking into account an individual patient's medical condition, personal needs, and preferences, and the physician's experience. Based on an individual patient's needs, treatment different from that outlined here could be warranted. These guidelines do not represent "standard of care."