Search

Background: In recent studies, receipt of chiropractic care has been associated with lower odds of receiving prescription opioids and, among those already prescribed, reduced doses of opioids among patients with non-cancer spine pain. These findings suggest that access to chiropractic services may reduce reliance on opioids for musculoskeletal pain., Objective: To assess the impact of chiropractic care on initiation, or continued use, of prescription opioids among patients with non-cancer spine pain., Methods: We will search for eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies indexed in MEDLINE, Embase, AMED, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Index to Chiropractic Literature from database inception to June 2024. Article screening, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment will be conducted independently by pairs of reviewers. We will conduct separate analyses for RCTs and observational studies and pool binary outcomes (e.g. prescribed opioid receipt, long-term opioid use, and higher versus lower opioid dose) as odds ratios (ORs) with associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). When studies provide hazard ratios (HRs) or relative risks (RRs) for time-to-event data (e.g. time-to-first opioid prescription) or incidence rates (number of opioid prescriptions over time), we will first convert them to an OR before pooling. Continuous outcomes such as pain intensity, sleep quality, or morphine equivalent dose will be pooled as weighted mean differences with associated 95% CIs. We will conduct meta-analyses using random-effects models and explore sources of heterogeneity using subgroup analyses and meta-regression. We will evaluate the certainty of evidence of all outcomes using the GRADE approach and the credibility of all subgroup effects with ICEMAN criteria. Our systematic review will follow the PRISMA statement and MOOSE guidelines., Discussion: Our review will establish the current evidence informing the impact of chiropractic care on new or continued prescription opioid use for non-cancer spine pain. We will disseminate our results through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations. The findings of our review will be of interest to patients, health care providers, and policy-makers., Trial Registration: Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42023432277., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Importance: Chronic back pain (CBP) is a leading cause of disability. Placebo treatments often provide as much pain relief as bona fide treatments, such as steroid injections. Open-label (honestly prescribed) placebos (OLPs) may relieve CBP without deception, but OLP mechanisms remain poorly understood., Objective: To investigate the long-term efficacy and neurobiological mechanisms of OLP for CBP., Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial of CBP with longitudinal functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) comparing OLP with usual care, with 1-year follow-up, was conducted in a university research setting and a community orthopedic clinic. Participants were individuals aged 21 to 70 years with CBP. The trial was conducted from November 2017 to August 2018, with 1-year follow-up completed by November 2019. Data analysis was performed from April 2020 to May 2024. The primary analysis was conducted on an intention-to-treat sample., Interventions: Participants randomized to OLP received a 1-time subcutaneous lumbar saline injection presented as placebo accompanied by information about the power of placebo to relieve pain, alongside their ongoing care. Usual care participants continued their ongoing care., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was pain intensity (0-10, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 the most intense) at 1 month posttreatment. Secondary outcomes included pain interference, depression, anxiety, anger, and sleep quality. Functional MRI was performed before and after treatment during evoked and spontaneous back pain., Results: A total of 101 adults (52 [51.4%] females; mean [SD] age, 40.4 [15.4] years) with moderate severity CBP (mean [SD], 4.10 [1.25] intensity; duration, 9.7 [8.5] years) were enrolled. Compared with usual care, OLP reduced CBP intensity posttreatment (relative reduction, 0.61; Hedges g = 0.45; 95% CI, -0.89 to 0.04; P = .02). Through 1-year follow-up, pain relief did not persist, although significant benefits were observed for depression, anger, anxiety, and sleep disruption (Hedges g = 0.3-0.5; all P < .03). Brain responses to evoked back pain for OLP vs usual care increased in rostral anterior cingulate and ventromedial prefrontal cortex and decreased in somatomotor cortices and thalamus. During spontaneous pain, functional connectivity analyses identified OLP vs usual care increases in ventromedial prefrontal cortex connectivity to the rostral ventral medulla, a pain-modulatory brainstem nucleus. No adverse effects of treatment were reported by participants., Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial of OLP vs usual care, a single nondeceptive placebo injection reduced CBP intensity for 1 month posttreatment and provided benefits lasting for at least 1 year posttreatment. Brain mechanisms of OLP in a clinical population overlap with those of deceptive placebos in healthy volunteers, including engagement of prefrontal-brainstem pain modulatory pathways., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03294148.

Background: The ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block (ESPB), traditionally utilized for thoracic regional pain control, has been reported as an effective analgesic option for mechanical back pain, renal colic, and rib fractures in the emergency department (ED). This pilot study aims to compare the effectiveness of the ESPB to usual analgesic treatment for patients presenting to the ED with mechanical back pain., Methods: A prospective, single-blind randomized controlled trial was conducted at a Canadian community hospital from March 2020 to December 2022. Adult patients presenting to the ED with mechanical back pain of at least 7 out of 10 on the Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) were randomized to receive either the ESPB or usual care. The primary outcome was the difference in NPRS score reduction at ED discharge. Secondary outcomes included ED length of stay, ED opiate use, follow-up NPRS and Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) scores, back pain-related return ED visits, and ongoing opiate use., Results: A total of 30 patients were enrolled, with 19 randomized to the ESPB cohort and 11 to the usual care cohort. The mean NPRS reduction at ED discharge was significantly higher in the ESPB group compared to the usual care group (5.4 vs. 2.2), with a difference of 3.2 (95% confidence interval 1.4-5.1). ED opiate use was lower in the ESPB group. The ESPB also resulted in a significant reduction in ED length of stay (160 min vs. 235 min). There were no reported adverse effects related to the research interventions., Conclusion: This pilot study suggests that the ESPB may be an effective opioid-sparing analgesic option for patients presenting to the ED with mechanical back pain., Gov Identifier: NCT05982483., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP)/ Association Canadienne de Médecine d'Urgence (ACMU).)

Background: Unused opioid prescriptions can be a driver of opioid misuse. Our objective was to determine the optimal quantity of opioids to prescribe to patients with acute pain at emergency department discharge, in order to meet their analgesic needs while limiting the amount of unused opioids., Methods: In a prospective, multicentre cohort study, we included consecutive patients aged 18 years and older with an acute pain condition present for less than 2 weeks who were discharged from emergency department with an opioid prescription. Participants completed a pain medication diary for real-time recording of quantity, doses, and names of all analgesics consumed during a 14-day follow-up period., Results: We included 2240 participants, who had a mean age of 51 years; 48% were female. Over 14 days, participants consumed a median of 5 (quartiles, 1-14) morphine 5 mg tablet equivalents, with significant variation across pain conditions ( p < 0.001). Most opioid tablets prescribed (63%) were unused. To meet the opioid need of 80% of patients for 2 weeks, we found that those experiencing renal colic or abdominal pain required fewer opioid tablets (8 morphine 5 mg tablet equivalents) than patients who had fractures (24 tablets), back pain (21 tablets), neck pain (17 tablets), or other musculoskeletal pain (16 tablets)., Interpretation: Two-thirds of opioid tablets prescribed at emergency department discharge for acute pain were unused, whereas opioid requirements varied significantly based on the cause of acute pain. Smaller, cause-specific opioid prescriptions could provide adequate pain management while reducing the risk of opioid misuse., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT03953534., Competing Interests: Competing interests:: Justin Yan reports receiving funding from the Spring 2021 Innovation Fund from the Academic Medical Organization of Southwestern Ontario, and the 2021 Internal Research Fund for Pilot Studies from the Lawson Health Research Institute. Dr. Yan has also served as the chair of the data safety monitoring boards of the RAFF4 Study and the REMOSYNCED Study, and vice-chair of the Canadian Association of the Emergency Physicians Research Committee. Jeffrey Perry reports receiving a peer review salary support grant from the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario. Gilles Lavigne reports receiving consulting fees from Straumann Suisse related to a sleep bruxism device, and an oral appliance for sleep apnea from Panthera Dental. Dr. Lavigne is also a board member of the Canadian Academy of Health Sciences. No other competing interests were declared., (© 2024 CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors.)

Context: Back pain is one of the most common problems experienced by patients after the cardiac electrophysiological study procedure. In addition, limitation of movement after the procedure negatively affects the comfort and satisfaction of patients., Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of back massage with frankincense and myrrh oil on back pain severity and comfort in patients who were to undergo cardiac electrophysiological study., Methods: This is a randomized controlled study with a pretest-posttest design. This study was conducted from October 2020 to March 2021, at the angio unit of a heart hospital at a university in Turkey. The study was completed with 30 patients in each group, a total of 90 people. Data were collected using a patient information form, a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and the General Comfort Questionnaire (GCQ). The intervention group and the placebo group received back massage with frankincense and myrrh essential oil and with jojoba fixed oil respectively. No intervention was applied to the control group., Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the post-procedure VAS values according to the groups. Except for sociocultural comfort, there were significant differences between the groups in terms of GCQ total scores and subscales at the first and last follow-up., Conclusions: Back massage with frankincense and myrrh oil increased overall comfort, physical comfort, the psychospiritual comfort. Additional research with a rigorous design is needed to determine its effect on pain., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Despite the crucial role of effective and sustained extinction of conditioned pain-related fear in cognitive-behavioral treatment approaches for chronic pain, experimental research on extinction memory retrieval in chronic pain remains scarce. In healthy populations, extinction efficacy of fear memory is affected by stress. Therefore, we investigated the effects of oral hydrocortisone administration on the reinstatement of pain-related associations in 57 patients with non-specific chronic back pain (CBP) and 59 healthy control (HC) participants in a differential pain-related conditioning paradigm within a placebo-controlled, randomized, and double-blind design. Participants' skin conductance responses indicate hydrocortisone-induced reinstatement effects in HCs but no observable reinstatement in HCs receiving placebo treatment. Interestingly, these effects were reversed in patients with CBP, that is, reinstatement responses were only observed in the placebo and not in the hydrocortisone group. Our findings corroborate previous evidence of stress-induced effects on extinction efficacy and reinstatement of fear memory in HCs, extending them into the pain context, and call for more research to clarify the role of stress in fear extinction and return of fear phenomena possibly contributing to treatment failure in chronic pain treatment. PERSPECTIVE: Opposing effects in HCs and patients with non-specific CBP may be associated with changes in the patients' stress systems. These findings could be of relevance to optimizing psychological, extinction-based treatment approaches., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background Context: With an increasing number of web-based calculators designed to provide the probabilities of an individual achieving improvement after lumbar spine surgery, there is a need to determine the accuracy of these models., Purpose: To perform an internal and external validation study of the reduced Quality Outcomes Database web-based Calculator (QOD-Calc)., Study Design: Observational longitudinal cohort., Patient Sample: Patients enrolled study-wide in Quality Outcomes Database (QOD) and patients enrolled in DaneSpine at a single institution who had elective lumbar spine surgery with baseline data to complete QOD-Calc and 12-month postoperative data., Outcome Measures: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Numeric Rating Scales (NRS) for back and leg pain, EuroQOL-5D (EQ-5D)., Methods: Baseline data elements were entered into QOD-Calc to determine the probability for each patient having Any Improvement and 30% Improvement in NRS leg pain, back pain, EQ-5D and ODI. These probabilities were compared with the actual 12-month postop data for each of the QOD and DaneSpine cases. Receiver-operating characteristics analyses were performed and calibration plots created to assess model performance., Results: 24,755 QOD cases and 8,105 DaneSpine lumbar cases were included in the analysis. QOD-Calc had acceptable to outstanding ability (AUC: 0.694-0.874) to predict Any Improvement in the QOD cohort and moderate to acceptable ability (AUC: 0.658-0.747) to predict 30% Improvement. QOD-Calc had acceptable to exceptional ability (AUC: 0.669-0.734) to predict Any improvement and moderate to exceptional ability (AUC: 0.619-0.862) to predict 30% Improvement in the DaneSpine cohort. AUCs for the DaneSpine cohort was consistently lower that the AUCs for the QOD validation cohort., Conclusion: QOD-Calc performs well in predicting outcomes in a patient population that is similar to the patients that was used to develop it. Although still acceptable, model performance was slightly worse in a distinct population, despite the fact that the sample was more homogenous. Model performance may also be attributed to the low discrimination threshold, with close to 90% of cases reporting Any Improvement in outcome. Prediction models may need to be developed that are highly specific to the characteristics of the population., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest One or more of the authors declare financial or professional relationships on ICMJE-TSJ disclosure forms., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Clinical trials generally have not assessed efficacy of long-term opioid therapy (LTOT) beyond 6 months because of methodological barriers and ethical concerns. We aimed to measure the effectiveness of LTOT for up to 12 months., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study among adults with chronic low back pain (CLBP) from April 2016 through August 2022. Participants reporting LTOT (>90 days) were matched to opioid nonusers with propensity scores. Primary outcomes involved low back pain intensity, back-related disability, and pain impact measured with a numerical rating scale, the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, and the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System, respectively. Secondary outcomes involved minimally important changes in primary outcomes., Results: The mean age of 402 matched participants was 55.4 years (S.D., 11.9 years), and 297 (73.9%) were female. There were 119 (59.2%) LTOT users who took opioids continuously for 12 months. The mean daily morphine milligram equivalent dosage at baseline was 36.7 (95% CI, 32.8 to 40.7). There were no differences between LTOT and control groups in mean pain intensity (6.06, 95% CI, 5.80-6.32 vs 5.92, 95% CI, 5.68-6.17), back-related disability (15.32, 95% CI, 14.55-16.09 vs 14.81, 95% CI, 13.99-15.62), or pain impact (32.51, 95% CI, 31.33-33.70 vs 31.22, 95% CI, 30.00 to 32.43). Correspondingly, LTOT users did not report greater likelihood of minimally important changes in any outcome., Conclusions: Using LTOT for up to 12 months is not more effective in improving CLBP outcomes than treatment without opioids. Clinicians should consider tapering opioid dosage among LTOT users in accordance with clinical practice guidelines., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: None., (© Copyright by the American Board of Family Medicine.)

Objective: To compare the response to nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) in patients with longstanding axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) and controls with back pain (nonspondyloarthritis [non-SpA])., Methods: Consecutive outpatients with chronic back pain (axSpA or non-SpA), were prospectively recruited. Any previous NSAIDs were withdrawn 2 days before study start (baseline). Back pain was assessed using a numerical rating scale (NRS; range 0-10) starting at 2 hours after baseline and several times thereafter up to 4 weeks. "Any response" to NSAIDs was defined as improvement of back pain on the NRS > 2 units, and "good response" as improvement > 50%, compared to baseline., Results: Among 233 patients included, 68 had axSpA (29.2%) and 165 had non-SpA back pain (70.8%). The mean age was 42.7 (SD 10.7) vs 49.3 (SD 11.1) years, symptom duration 15.1 (SD 11.1) years vs 14.6 (SD 11.9) years, and pain score 5.9 (SD 2.3) vs 6.3 (SD 2.0), respectively. Overall, of patients with axSpA or non-SpA back pain, 30.9% vs 29.1% of patients showed any response and 23.5% vs 16.4% of patients showed a good response after 4 weeks, respectively ( P value not significant). No differences were found in the rapidity of response or between subgroups of patients based on demographics, including different stages of axSpA., Conclusion: No major differences in the response to NSAIDs were found between patients with axSpA and those with non-SpA with longstanding chronic back pain. The item in the Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society classification criteria on "response to NSAIDs" needs more study., (Copyright © 2024 by the Journal of Rheumatology.)

Background and Objective: Myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) is a chronic musculoskeletal disorder characterized by the presence of trigger points. Among the treatment options, botulinum toxin injections have been investigated. The aim of this paper was to provide a synthesis of the evidence on intramuscular botulinum toxin injections for upper back MPS., Databases and Data Treatment: A systematic review of the literature was performed on the PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane Library, using the following formula: ("botulinum") AND ("musculoskeletal") AND ("upper back pain") OR ("myofascial pain")., Results: Ten studies involving 651 patients were included. Patients in the control groups received placebo (saline solution) injections, anaesthetic injections + dry needling or anaesthetic injections. The analysis of the trials revealed modest methodological quality: one "Good quality" study, one "Fair" and the other "Poor". No major complications or serious adverse events were reported. Results provided conflicting evidence and did not demonstrate the superiority of botulinum toxin over comparators. Most of the included trials were characterized by a small sample size, weak power analysis, different clinical scores used and non-comparable follow-up periods. Even if there is no conclusive evidence, the favourable safety profile and the positive results of some secondary endpoints suggest a potentially beneficial action in pain control and quality of life., Conclusion: The currently available studies show conflicting results. Their overall low methodological quality does not allow for solid evidence of superiority over other comparison treatments. Further insights are needed to properly profile patients who could benefit more from this peculiar injective approach., Significance: The randomized controlled trials included in this review compared using botulinum toxin to treat upper back MPS with placebo or active treatments (e.g., dry needling or anaesthetics) showing mixed results overall. Despite the lack of clear evidence of superiority, our study suggests that the use of botulinum toxin should not be discouraged. Its safety profile and encouraging results in pain control, motor recovery and disability reduction make it an interesting treatment, particularly in the subset of patients with moderate to severe chronic pain and active trigger points. To support the safety and efficacy of botulinum toxin, further high-quality studies are needed., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Pain published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Pain Federation - EFIC ®.)

Background: Back pain is the leading cause of disability worldwide. Despite guidelines discouraging opioids as first-line treatment, opioids remain the most prescribed drugs for back pain. There is renewed interest in exploring the potential medical applications of cannabis, and with the recent changes in national legislation there is a unique opportunity to investigate the analgesic properties of cannabis., Methods: This was a multi-center survey-based study examining patient perceptions regarding cannabis for spine pain. We included patients presenting with back or neck pain to one of three Orthopedic clinics in Ontario. Our primary outcome was perceived effect of cannabis on back pain, while secondary outcomes were perceptions regarding potential applications and barriers to cannabis use., Results: 259 patients participated in this study, 35.3% (90/255) stating they used cannabis medically. Average pain severity was 6.5/10 ± 0.3 (95% CI 6.2-6.8). Nearly three-quarters were prescribed opioids (73.6%, 148/201), with oxycodone/oxycontin (45.9% 68/148) being the most common, and almost half of (49.3%, 73/148) had used an opioid in the last week. Patients estimated cannabis could treat 54.3% ± 4.0 (95% CI 50.3-58.3%) of their spine pain and replace 46.2% ± 6. 6 (95% CI 39.6-52.8%) of their current analgesics. Age (β = - 0.3, CI - 0.6-0.0), higher pain severity (β = 0.4, CI 0.1-0.6) and previous cannabis use (β = 14.7, CI 5.1-24.4) were associated with a higher perceived effect of cannabis. Patients thought cannabis would be beneficial to treat pain (129/146, 88.4%), and reduce (116/146, 79.5%) or eliminate opioids (102/146, 69.9%). Not considering using cannabis for medical purposes (65/150, 43.3%) was the number one reported barrier., Conclusions: Patients estimated medical cannabis could treat more than half of their spine pain, with one in three patients already using medical cannabis. 79% of patients also believe cannabis could reduce opioid usage. This data will help support more research into cannabis for musculoskeletal pain., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Background and Objectives : In the Western world, back pain and sciatica are among the main causes of disability and absence from work with significant personal, social, and economic costs. This prospective observational study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a rehabilitation program combined with the administration of Alpha Lipoic Acid, Acetyl-L-Carnitine, Resveratrol, and Cholecalciferol in the treatment of sciatica due to herniated discs in young patients in terms of pain resolution, postural alterations, taking painkillers, and quality of life. Materials and Methods : A prospective observational study was conducted on 128 patients with sciatica. We divided the sample into 3 groups: the Combo group, which received a combination of rehabilitation protocol and daily therapy with 600 mg Alpha Lipoic Acid, 1000 mg Acetyl-L-Carnitine, 50 mg Resveratrol, and 800 UI Cholecalciferol for 30 days; the Reha group, which received only a rehabilitation protocol; and the Supplement group, which received only oral supplementation with 600 mg Alpha Lipoic Acid, 1000 mg Acetyl-L-Carnitine, 50 mg Resveratrol, and 800 UI Cholecalciferol. Clinical assessments were made at the time of recruitment (T0), 30 days after the start of treatment (T1), and 60 days after the end of treatment (T2). The rating scales were as follows: the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS); the Oswestry Disability Questionnaire (ODQ); and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). All patients also underwent an instrumental stabilometric evaluation. Results : At T1, the Combo group showed statistically superior results compared to the other groups for pain ( p < 0.05), disability ( p < 0.05), and quality of life ( p < 0.05). At T2, the Combo group showed statistically superior results compared to the other groups only for pain ( p < 0.05) and quality of life ( p < 0.05). From the analysis of the stabilometric evaluation data, we only observed a statistically significant improvement at T2 in the Combo group for the average X ( p < 0.05) compared to the other groups. Conclusions : The combined treatment of rehabilitation and supplements with anti-inflammatory, pain-relieving, and antioxidant action is effective in the treatment of sciatica and can be useful in improving postural stability.

Purpose: This study based exclusively on register-data provides a scientific basis for further research on the use of opioids in patients with degenerative back disorder. The main objective of this study is to investigate whether surgically treated back pain patients have the same risk of being long-term opioid users as back pain patients who did not have surgery., Methods: We performed a retrospective register-based cohort study based on all patients diagnosed with a degenerative back disorder at the Spine Center of Southern Denmark from 2011 to 2017. The primary outcome of the study was the use of opioids two years after the patient's first hospital contact with a degenerative back condition. Fisher exact tests were used for descriptive analyses. The effect of the surgery was estimated using adjusted logistic regression analyses., Results: For patients who used opioids before the first hospital contact, the ratio for long-term opioid use for surgically treated patients is significantly lower than for non-surgically treated patients (OR = 0.75, 95%CI (0.66; 0.86)). For patients who did not use opioids before, the ratio for long-term opioid use for surgically treated patients does not differ from that of non-surgically treated patients (OR = 1.01, 95%CI (0.84; 1.22))., Conclusions: Patients with a degenerative back disorder who used opioids before their first visit to a specialized spine center have a lower risk of becoming long-term opioid users if they were surgically treated. Whereas for patients who did not use opioids before the first visit, surgical treatment does not influence the risk of becoming long-term opioid users., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Study Design: Mendelian randomization (MR) study., Objective: To examine whether antihypertensive medications (beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors) and statins can be repurposed to prevent or treat spinal pain (back or neck pain)., Summary of Background Data: Observational studies and a recent MR study have found associations between elevated blood pressure and a greater risk of back pain. Observational studies have found associations between hyperlipidemia and statin use and greater risk of back pain. No prior MR studies have examined the effects of antihypertensives or statins on spinal pain., Materials and Methods: This was a two-sample MR study using publicly available summary statistics from large-scale genome-wide association studies (GWAS). Sample sizes in exposure GWASs were n=757,601 (systolic blood pressure) and n=173,082 (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol), and n=1,028,947 for the outcome GWAS of spinal pain defined as health care seeking for any spinal pain-related diagnosis. Genes and cis-acting variants were identified as proxies for the drug targets of interest. MR analyses used inverse-variance weighted meta-analysis. The threshold for statistical significance after correction for multiple testing was P <0.0125., Results: No statistically significant associations of these medications with spinal pain were found. However, findings were suggestive of a protective effect of beta-blockers on spinal pain risk (odds ratio [OR] 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72-0.98; P =0.03), and calcium channel blockers on greater spinal pain risk (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.02-1.24; P =0.02)., Conclusions: A protective effect of beta-blockers on spinal pain was suggested in the current study, consistent with findings from observational studies of various other pain phenotypes. The detrimental effect of calcium channel blockers on spinal pain suggested in the current study must be interpreted in the context of conflicting directions of effect on nonspinal pain phenotypes in other observational studies.This Mendelian randomization study examined whether antihypertensive medications (beta-blockers, calcium channel blockers, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors) and statins can be repurposed to prevent or treat spinal.This was a two-sample MR study using publicly available summary statistics from large-scale genome-wide association studies ranging size from 173,082 to 1,028,947 adults.While no statistically significant associations were found, a protective effect of beta-blockers on spinal pain was suggested (odds ratio [OR] 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.72 to 0.98; p= 0.03), as was a detrimental effect of calcium channel blockers on spinal pain (OR 1.12, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.24; p= 0.02)., Competing Interests: P.S. is an employee of the VA Puget Sound Health Care System and the Director of the Resource Core of the University of Washington Clinical Learning, Evidence and Research (CLEAR) Center, which was funded by NIAMS/NIH P30AR072572. E.E.E. was supported by the Russian Science Foundation (RSF) grant № 22-15-20037 and the Government of the Novosibirsk region. Y.A.T. was supported by the budget project of the Institute of Cytology and Genetics № FWNR-2022-0020. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Back pain is currently one of the most urgent problems within pain syndromes. Inadequate treatment of nonspecific back pain, even with a relatively favorable prognosis, leads to its chronicity and decreases the patient's quality of life. The most common cause of vertebrogenic dorsopathies is spinal osteochondrosis. The etiopathogenetic basis of spinal osteochondrosis is degenerative and dystrophic changes in the intervertebral discs involving adjacent vertebrae, joints, and ligaments. Considering the experience of many years of using chondroprotective therapy in clinical practice, we performed an observational study using Ambene Bio to assess the change of pain severity over time in patients with osteochondrosis and back pain., Aim: To study the change in the severity of pain and its components in patients with back pain during therapy with Ambene Bio combined with standard therapy (NSAIDs and muscle relaxants)., Materials and Methods: Fifty-one patients with chronic lower back pain lasting more than 3 months were included in the study., Conclusion: The study results confirmed the high efficacy of Ambene Bio in patients with dorsopathies with an alternating treatment regimen (10 IM injections 2 mL every other day).

Spine injections are commonly performed in the treatment of back pain. The purpose of this article is to review the current literature surrounding image guided spine injections focusing on scenarios where fluoroscopic guidance can be advantageous in addition to discussing similarities among the different modalities., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to International Skeletal Society (ISS).)

Back pain is one of the most common medical problems and is associated with high socioeconomic costs. Imaging-guided spinal injections are a minimally invasive method to evaluate where the back pain is originating from, and to treat patients with radicular pain or spinal stenosis with infiltration of corticosteroids. CT-guided spine injections are a safe procedure, characterized by precise needle placement, excellent visualization of the relevant anatomical structures, and low radiation exposure for the patient and the interventional radiologist. In this review article, the variety of applications of CT-guided injections (focused on nerve roots and epidural injections) and the optimal injection procedure as well as risks and side effects are discussed., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) play an important role in the multifaceted management of neck and back pain. Corticosteroid preparations used in ESIs may be considered "particulate" or "non-particulate" based on whether they form a crystalline suspension or a soluble clear solution, respectively. In the past two decades, there have been reports of rare but severe and permanent neurological complications as a result of ESI. These complications have principally occurred with particulate corticosteroid preparations when using a transforaminal injection technique at cervical or thoracic levels, and only rarely in the lumbosacral spine. As a result, some published clinical guidelines and recommendations have advised against the use of particulate corticosteroids for transforaminal ESI, and the FDA introduced a warning label for injectable corticosteroids regarding the risk of serious neurological adverse events. There is growing evidence that the efficacy of non-particulate corticosteroids for pain relief and functional improvement after ESI is non-inferior to particulate agents, and that non-particulate injections almost never result in permanent neurological injury. Despite this, particulate corticosteroids continue to be routinely used for transforaminal epidural injections. More consistent clinical guidelines and societal recommendations are required alongside increased awareness of the comparative efficacy of non-particulate agents among specialists who perform ESIs. The current role for particulate corticosteroids in ESIs should be limited to caudal and interlaminar approaches, or transforaminal injections in the lumbar spine only if initial non-particulate ESI resulted in a significant but short-lived improvement., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to International Skeletal Society (ISS).)

Competing Interests: MDS and JCB are board members (unpaid) of Physicians for Responsible Opioid Prescribing and have been paid consultants in opioid litigation.

Familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) is a genetic autoinflammatory disease that is characterized by recurrent episodes of fever, serositis, and synovitis. FMF synovitis attacks resemble the clinical presentation of acute monoarthritis with pain and hydrarthrosis, which always resolve spontaneously. In most cases, colchicine will prevent these painful arthritis attacks in FMF. However, distinguishing these arthritis episodes from other febrile attacks with various clinical manifestations, including serositis, is important. We describe a Japanese patient with FMF who presented a febrile attack with severe abdominal and upper back pain (peri-scapula lesion), without any other joint involvement. A 44-year-old female patient presented with recurrent episodes of fever with abdominal and back pain. She carried heterozygous variants in exon 3 of the MEFV gene (P369S/R408Q). She was diagnosed with FMF according to Tel-Hashomer's diagnostic criteria for FMF. Colchicine treatment improved her febrile attcks with peritonitis, however, severe back pain was sustained. This unique aspect of severe pain attack was successfully resolved by canakinumab treatment, which is a specific interleukin-1β monoclonal antibody, and was finally diagnosed as FMF-related shoulder joint synovitis. Further investigations were needed to evaluate the effectiveness of interleukin-1 antagonists against colchicine-resistant arthritis in FMF patients.

Abstract: Patients with chronic pain show large placebo effects in clinical trials, and inert pills can lead to clinically meaningful analgesia that can last from days to weeks. Whether the placebo response can be predicted reliably, and how to best predict it, is still unknown. We have shown previously that placebo responders can be identified through the language content of patients because they speak about their life, and their pain, after a placebo treatment. In this study, we examine whether these language properties are present before placebo treatment and are thus predictive of placebo response and whether a placebo prediction model can also dissociate between placebo and drug responders. We report the fine-tuning of a language model built based on a longitudinal treatment study where patients with chronic back pain received a placebo (study 1) and its validation on an independent study where patients received a placebo or drug (study 2). A model built on language features from an exit interview from study 1 was able to predict, a priori, the placebo response of patients in study 2 (area under the curve = 0.71). Furthermore, the model predicted as placebo responders exhibited an average of 30% pain relief from an inert pill, compared with 3% for those predicted as nonresponders. The model was not able to predict who responded to naproxen nor spontaneous recovery in a no-treatment arm, suggesting specificity of the prediction to placebo. Taken together, our initial findings suggest that placebo response is predictable using ecological and quick measures such as language use., (Copyright © 2022 International Association for the Study of Pain.)

Background: Back pain is common among older adults resulting in the high societal and economic burden of persistent pain and disability. Pain medications are frequently prescribed for back pain, especially among older patients, but the efficacy of analgesics on back pain in this patient population remains under debate. In the present study, we investigated the outcomes (i.e. pain intensity and disability) of pain medication use in older people with back pain participating in a prospective cohort study., Methods: A total of 669 patients aged >55 years consulting a general practitioner for a new episode of back complaints were included in this study. The association between pain medication use and outcomes (pain intensity and disability) was assessed at 3-month follow-up., Results: Pain medication users were observed to experience more pain and disability at baseline compared with non-users. At 3-month follow-up, patients from all subgroups (e.g. pain medication users versus non-users) improved over time. Yet medication users had higher pain intensity and poorer disability scores compared with non-users. Patients who de-escalated or stopped pain medication had lower pain and disability than non-users. When comparing different types of medications (i.e. paracetamol, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids), none of the groups showed better scores regarding pain and disability in users compared with non-users. Opioid users displayed the highest levels of pain and disability., Conclusions: In the present study, although patients who de-escalated or stopped analgesics had less pain and disability, pain medication overall does not result in better outcomes in older people with back pain., Significance: Older patients taking pain medication did not report better outcomes than the ones who did not, except for those who de-escalated or stopped pain medication. Caution should be taken in prescribing pain medication for older patients with back pain in primary care., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Pain published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Pain Federation - EFIC ®.)

Objectives: Patients frequently present to the emergency department (ED) with neck or back pain, which can be difficult to treat. We sought to compare ultrasound-guided trigger point injection (TPI) to standard medications for patients with neck or back pain., Methods: We performed a single-center, open label, randomized controlled trial on ED patients with neck or back pain from myofascial pain syndrome comparing ultrasound-guided TPIs to those who received the combination of a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) and a muscle relaxant (MR). The primary outcome of this study was the reduction in mean pain score at the time of ED disposition., Results: In total, we analyzed 196 patients. At the time of ED disposition, patients in the TPI group had a mean reduction in their pain scores of 45.0 mm as compared to 49.9 mm in the NSAID plus MR group (difference: 4.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) -3.0 to 12.7], P = .22). At the first reassessment, patients in the TPI group had greater pain reduction by 10.7 mm (95% CI 3.1 to 18.4). The rate of rescue therapy use was higher in the NSAID plus MR group (difference: 17.5% [95% CI 4.4 to 36.2])., Conclusions: We found no difference in pain reduction at the time of ED disposition between patients randomized to the ultrasound-guided TPI group as compared to those who received an NSAID plus a MR. However, patients in the TPI group had greater pain reduction at the time of first reassessment and lower rates of rescue therapy use., (© 2022 American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.)

Study Design: Secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial., Objective: To assess how baseline treatment with opioids is associated with pain and function in older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis who receive epidural injections., Summary of Background Data: Data were obtained from the Lumbar Epidural Steroid injections for Spinal Stenosis trial, a double-blind, multisite, randomized controlled trial., Methods: Baseline treatment with opioids was assessed from electronic medical record prescription pharmacy data or from health utilization records collected from patients. We calculated adjusted changes in back pain numerical rating scale, leg pain numerical rating scale, and back-related disability (Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire scores) from baseline to three weeks and to six weeks among patients treated and not treated with opioids at baseline using generalized linear regression., Results: Baseline treatment with opioids was not significantly associated with back pain intensity (adjusted difference in means at three weeks of follow-up between patients treated with opioids at baseline versus not [±95% CI, 0.1 (-0.7, 0.7)], leg pain intensity [-0.2 (-0.9, 0.4)], or back-related function [-0.8 (-2.1, 0.4)]. We found similar results at six weeks of follow-up., Conclusions: Among older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis who are receiving epidural injections, those treated with opioids at baseline had similar outcomes to those who were not., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Prevalence of osteoarthritis (OA) is increasing alarmingly worldwide. Slowing down the progression of OA and diverse locomotive organ disorders is gaining interest in improving the quality of life (QOL) and extending healthy life-span. In a pilot study, intake of a small amount of undenatured type II collagen exhibited suppression of damage to the articular cartilage via oral immune tolerance. It also demonstrated improvement of knee and joint flexibility and mobility with continued intake of undenatured type II collagen (NEXT-II®) derived from chicken sternum cartilage. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical investigation (RCT) evaluated the efficacy and safety of 12 weeks of regular intake of NEXT-II ® on joint and motor function in healthy Japanese male and female participants (aged 20 to <75 years)., Sixty-four participants were randomized to receive either NEXT-II ® (undenatured type II collagen 3.2 mg/d) or placebo over a period of 12 consecutive weeks. Efficacy on joint and motor functions were evaluated measuring knee passive range of motion as the primary outcome; the Japan Knee Osteoarthritis Measure (JKOM), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for knee discomfort, and motor functions (10-meter walking and stair-climbing test) as the secondary outcomes; and Japan Low back pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JLEQ) and VAS for lower back discomfort as the exploratory outcomes., Fifty-eight participants (placebo = 28; NEXT-II ® group = 30) completed the study. In the assessment of knee passive range of motion, significant improvements in "flexion" and "flexible angle (range)" were observed in the NEXT-II ® group at 4, 8, and 12 weeks of treatment. NEXT-II ® induced significant improvements in JKOM, VAS for knee and lower back discomfort, 10-meter walking test, stair-climbing test, and JLEQ., Results demonstrate that undenatured type II collagen is safe and efficacious in improving knee flexibility and mobility, reducing knee and lower back pain, and enhancing motor function.

Background: There is growing evidence of the anti-inflammatory effect of the anti-diabetic drug metformin and its use to reduce pain. However, we currently lack studies investigating whether metformin is associated with a reduction in chronic back pain prevalence when considering physical activity levels, body mass index (BMI), and age., Objective: To investigate whether use of metformin is associated with lower levels of reporting of chronic back pain in a large cohort with type 2 diabetes when stratified for physical activity, BMI, and age., Methods: This is a cross-sectional study of 21,889 participants with type 2 diabetes who were drawn from the UK Biobank database. We investigated whether people using metformin reported a higher prevalence of chronic low back pain than those who did not. Type 2 diabetes, chronic back pain, and metformin were self-reported. Participants were stratified according to their physical activity level (low, moderate and high), BMI (normal, overweight, and obese), and age (40 to <50; 50 to < 60; and ≥60 years). Logistic regression models were built for each physical activity level, BMI and age category to investigate the prevalence of chronic back pain amongst those using and not using metformin., Results: Participants who were using metformin and who had low levels of physical activity [OR 0.87, 95%CI 0.78 to 0.96] or who were obese [OR 0.90, 95%CI 0.86 to 0.98] or older [OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.78 to 0.93] had lower odds of reporting chronic back pain than their counterparts., Conclusion: The anti-diabetic drug metformin might reduce prevalence of chronic low back pain in people who are older, overweight, or less active. These findings should be confirmed in studies using a longitudinal design., Competing Interests: The authors have declared no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Carvalho-e-Silva et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Objective: We aimed to investigate whether ibuprofen use, compared with other non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (ns-NSAIDs), cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors (COX-2i) or paracetamol, increases the risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis or hospitalisation., Design: A prevalent user and active comparator cohort study., Setting: Two US claims databases (Open Claims and PharMetrics Plus) mapped to the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model., Participants: Insured patients with a history of osteoarthritis or back pain and receiving ibuprofen, other ns-NSAIDs, COX-2i or paracetamol between 1 November, 2019 and 31 January, 2020 (study enrolment window 1) or between 1 February, 2020 and 31 October, 2020 (study enrolment window 2)., Main Outcome Measures: Large-scale propensity score matching and empirical calibration were used to minimise confounding. Incidence and hazard ratios of COVID-19 diagnosis and hospitalisation according to drug/s use were estimated and pooled in the same study period across data sources using a fixed-effects meta-analysis. Index treatment episode was the primary risk evaluation window, censored at the time of discontinuation., Results: A total of 633,562 and 1,063,960 participants were included in periods 1 and 2, respectively, for the ibuprofen versus ns-NSAIDs comparison, 311,669 and 524,470 for ibuprofen versus COX-2i, and 492,002 and 878,598 for ibuprofen versus paracetamol. Meta-analyses of empirically calibrated hazard ratios revealed no significantly differential risk of COVID-19 outcomes in users of ibuprofen versus any of the other studied analgesic classes: hazard ratios were 1.13 (0.96-1.33) for the ibuprofen-ns-NSAIDs comparison, 1.03 (0.83-1.28) for the ibuprofen-COX-2i comparison and 1.13 (0.74-1.73) for ibuprofen-paracetamol comparison on COVID-19 diagnosis in the February 2020-October 2020 window. Similar hazard ratios were found on COVID-19 hospitalisation and across both study periods., Conclusions: In patients with osteoarthritis or back pain, we found no differential risks of incident COVID-19 diagnosis or COVID-19 hospitalisation for ibuprofen users compared with other ns-NSAIDs, COX-2i or paracetamol. Our findings support regulatory recommendations that NSAIDs, including ibuprofen, should be prescribed as indicated in the same way as before the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for those who rely on ibuprofen or NSAIDs to manage chronic arthritis or musculoskeletal pain symptoms., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

We report a case of isolated lesions of the thoracic spine attributed to synovitis, acne, pustulosis, hyperostosis, and osteitis (SAPHO) syndrome. A 55-year-old woman who suffered from 6 months of back pain had vertebral osteomyelitis on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). There were no laboratory findings suggestive of infection, malignancy, or autoimmune disease. Radiography, computed tomography (CT), and MRI of the thoracic spine showed mixed lesions of sclerosis and erosion, whereas bone scintigraphy did not show accumulation at any site except the thoracic spine. No lesions in the anterior chest wall or sacroiliac joints were apparent from CT and MRI. No lesions other than at the thoracic spine were observed. As the isolated lesions of the thoracic spine were considered not to have resulted from infection, malignancy, or autoimmune disease, the patient was referred to our department for differential diagnosis. Given that isolated sterile hyperostosis/osteitis among adults is included in the modified diagnostic criteria for SAPHO syndrome, we suspected that the mixed lesions of sclerosis and erosion of the thoracic spine in this case may reflect SAPHO syndrome with chronic non-bacterial osteitis (CNO) of the thoracic spine. Treatment with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) was initiated and led to alleviation of her back pain, although the thoracic spine lesions remained on the 6-month MRI. Based on the CNO of the thoracic spine and the rapid response to NSAIDs, the final diagnosis was SAPHO syndrome with isolated lesions of the thoracic spine., (© Japan College of Rheumatology 2022. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: Retrospective comparative analysis of the use of SYSADOA preparations containing chondroitin sulfate (Chondroguard, 2 ml, 25 amp., glycosaminoglycan-peptide complex, 1 ml 25 amp., bioactive concentrate of small marine fish, 2 ml, 10 amp.) in patients with chronic non-specific low back pain (LBP) of lumbar and sacral localization caused by spondylosis and osteochondrosis of the lumbar spine, at the stage of outpatient care., Material and Methods: Data of medical records of patients ( n =120; men - 32, women - 88, age - 54.1±7.6 years, duration of disease exacerbation 4.0±1.7 months) with nonspecific LBP were systematized according to the inclusion/exclusion criteria. All patients were divided into 4 groups: Group 1 ( n =30) received Chondroguard im., 2 ml every other day, the course of treatment was 25 injections, 25 days; Group 2 ( n =30) received glycosaminoglycan-peptide complex on the 1st day - 0.3 ml, on the 2nd day - 0.5 ml, and then 3 times a week for 1 ml, course of treatment - 25 injections, 25 days; Group 3 ( n =30) received bioactive concentrate of small marine fish, 2 ml im., every other day, the course of treatment was 10 injections; repeated courses of treatment - after 6 months; Group 4 ( n =30) received Amelotex (meloxicam) at a dose of 15 mg once a day for 15 days. All patients of the first 3 groups received Amelotex at a dose of 15 mg with the possibility of reducing the dose to 7.5 mg or completely discontinuing the drug if necessary. Retrospectively, dynamic monitoring was performed in the medical records of outpatients after 50 days and 6 months from the start of therapy according to the following parameters: intensity of pain according to VAS, short form of the McGill pain questionnaire, vital signs of patients (Oswestry Disability Index, version 2.1a [Oswestry Disability Index], and Roland-Morris questionnaire), propensity to chronic pain syndrome according to the STarT Back Screening Tool questionnaire, the presence and severity of comorbid fibromyalgia according to the Fibromyalgia Rapid Screening Tool questionnaire, the level of pain catastrophization according to the Pain Catastrophizing Scale, the severity of comorbid anxiety and depression according to the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the severity comorbid insomnia (Insomnia Severity Index), quality of life according to the SF-36 scale, the effectiveness of drugs according to the patient on a 5-point scale, the need to take NSAIDs and analgesics, tolerability on a 4-point system. The safety of therapy was monitored using the WHO and Naranjo scales., Results: In patients with nonspecific LBP, a greater degree of reduction in the intensity of the pain syndrome, a smaller number of exacerbations of the pain syndrome over 6 months of observation, an improvement in the functional status and life activity, a tendency to a decrease in the severity of anxiety and depression, sleep disturbances and comorbid fibromyalgia, limiting the risk of chronicity and catastrophization of pain, the presence of a structure-modifying effect on IVD and degenerative changes in the facet joints, a significant improvement in the physical and mental components of health, high satisfaction and safety of therapy, which included taking Chondroguard with meloxicam, with a decrease in the need to take the latter by the 50th day observation period compared to other regimens. The effects of Chondroguard and meloxicam turned out to be long-term and were recorded by the 6th month in the absence of Chondroguard, which indicated the preservation of the influence of highly purified cholesterol on the pathogenetic mechanisms of the formation of LBP., Conclusion: The study allows us to recommend the use of a parenteral form of cholesterol (Chondroguard, CJSC «PharmFirma «Sotex», Russia) for the treatment of nonspecific LBP with moderate or severe pain, chronic relapsing or persistent course, in combination with NSAIDs and their subsequent cancellation or administration on demand.

Acute pain syndromes caused by discogenic lumbosacral radiculopathy and lumboischialgia are not uncommon in clinical practice and characterized by a high risk of becoming chronic. The pathogenetic aspects, features of the clinical picture, existing approaches to conservative treatment of these conditions are analyzed in this paper. Data on the efficacy and safety of a fixed combination of diclofenac and orphenadrine (Neodolpasse) use in the treatment of vertebrogenic pain syndromes based on the NEODOLEX study results are presented, and the authors' own clinical observations are given. Possible reasons for the high efficacy of Neodolpasse in patients with discogenic radiculopathies and nonspecific back and neck pain are discussed.

Background: Back pain is one of the most common reasons for a person to call an ambulance service, yet how ambulance services manage back pain has not been described., Methods: Australian-state and New Zealand ambulance service jurisdiction websites were searched between 25th January to 3rd February 2022. Pain management guidelines were included where no specific back pain guideline was found. Identified guidelines were screened, appraised using AGREE II tool and recommendations on pharmacological and non-pharmacological management of back pain, ambulance transport and alerting features were extracted, summarised, and compared to two primary care guidelines., Results: Nine guidelines were identified including four back pain and 5 pain management guidelines. All four back pain guidelines recommend paracetamol or ibuprofen as analgesic options to manage back pain. These guidelines recommend transport to the emergency department when there are alerting features for serious disease, lack of pain control or where the patient is unable to ambulate. 2 out of 9 ambulance guidelines were recommended for use in their existing format following quality appraisal using AGREE II tool. Ambulance guidelines scored significantly lower than primary care guidelines for back pain., Conclusion: Ambulance service guidelines for back pain recommend advice, reassurance, paracetamol and referral to primary care., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 College of Emergency Nursing Australasia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We describe pain intensity and opioid prescription jointly over time in Veterans with back pain to better understand their relationship., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study on electronic health record data from 117 126 Veterans (mean age 49.2 years) diagnosed with back pain in 2015. We used latent class growth analysis to jointly model pain intensity (0-10 scores) and opioid prescriptions over 2 years to identify classes of individuals similar in their trajectory of pain and opioid over time. Multivariable multinomial logit models assessed sociodemographic and clinical predictors of class membership., Results: We identified six trajectory classes: a "no pain/no opioid" class (22.2%), a "mild pain/no opioid" class (45.0%), a "moderate pain/no opioid" class (24.6%), a "moderate, decreasing pain/decreasing opioid" class (3.3%), a "moderate pain/high opioid" class (2.6%), and a "moderate, increasing pain/increasing opioid" class (2.3%). Among those in moderate pain classes, being white (vs. non-white) and older were associated with higher odds of being prescribed opioids. Veterans with mental health diagnoses had increased odds of being in the painful classes versus "no pain/no opioid" class., Conclusion: We found distinct patterns in the long-term joint course of pain and opioid prescription in Veterans with back pain. Understanding these patterns and associated predictors may help with development of targeted interventions for patients with back pain., (© 2022 John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This article has been contributed to by U.S. Government employees and their work is in the public domain in the USA.)

Background: Human brucellosis is the most frequently contracted zoonotic infection worldwide. Although being an old disease that carries minimal risks of mortality, it remains a source of considerable sequelae and disability. However, noncontiguous multifocal spinal involvement is an exceptional presentation of brucellosis; additionally, an associated paravertebral abscess is extremely rare., Case Presentation: This paper focuses on a 67-year-old Lebanese woman with noncontiguous multifocal Brucella spondylodiscitis, involving the T12-L1 and L3-L4 segments, with paravertebral abscess formation. She presented with a 3-week history of acute severe lumbar back pain, radiating to the lower extremities and associated with impaired mobility and lower extremity weakness. The patient complained of night sweating but had no fever. No lymphadenopathy, hepatomegaly, or splenomegaly could be observed. She had painful percussion of the lumbar spine, painful passive mobilization, and paravertebral tenderness, yet her neurological examination was completely normal. BrucellaCapt test was positive at a titer of 1/5120 (reference range 1/180). The patient was treated with an inpatient regimen for 2 weeks, which was followed by an outpatient oral antibiotic regimen with doxycycline, rifampin, and ciprofloxacin to complete a total treatment duration of 3 months. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed at the end of the treatment and showed a complete resolution of the paravertebral abscess., Conclusion: Noncontiguous multifocal Brucella spondylodiscitis with paravertebral abscess is an extremely rare presentation. It may be effectively managed by antibiotic therapy, without surgery or drainage, in the absence of neurological complications. Nonetheless, the principal challenge to an efficient management is establishing the diagnosis of Brucella in the first place. In endemic countries, a strong suspicion of spinal involvement of brucellosis should be elicited in front of back pain presentations-even in the absence of fever and other related symptoms., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are widely used to alleviate lumbosacral radicular pain. Knowledge of the therapeutic outcomes of TFESI allows clinicians to elucidate therapeutic plans for managing lumbosacral radicular pain. Deep learning (DL) can outperform traditional machine learning techniques and learn from unstructured and perceptual data. A convolutional neural network (CNN) is a representative DL model., Objectives: We developed and investigated the accuracy of a CNN model for predicting therapeutic outcomes after TFESI for controlling chronic lumbosacral radicular pain using T2-weighted sagittal lumbar spine magnetic resonance (MR) images as input data., Study Design: Imaging study using DL., Setting: At the spine center of a university hospital., Methods: We collected whole T2-weighted sagittal lumbar spine MR images from 503 patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain due to a herniated lumbar disc (HLD) and spinal stenosis. A "good outcome" was defined as a >= 50% reduction in the numeric rating scale (NRS-11) score at 2 months after TFESI vs the pretreatment NRS-11 score. A "poor outcome" was defined as a < 50% decrease in the NRS-11 score at 2 months after TFESI vs pretreatment., Results: In the prediction of therapeutic outcomes after TFESI on the validation dataset, the area under the curve was 0.827., Limitations: Our study was limited in that we used a small amount of lumbar spine MR imaging data to train the CNN model., Conclusions: We demonstrated that a CNN model trained, using whole lumbar spine sagittal T2-weighted MR images, could help determine outcomes after TFESI in patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain due to an HLD or spinal stenosis.

Objectives: Oregon Medicaid (Oregon Health Plan, or OHP) implemented an innovative policy in 2016 that increased coverage of evidence-based non-pharmacologic therapies (NPT, including physical therapy, massage, chiropractic, and acupuncture) while restricting opioids, epidural steroid injections, and surgeries. The objective of this study was to compare the perspectives of clinicians who see back pain patients and can prescribe pharmacologic therapies and/or refer to NPTs and clinicians who directly provide NPT therapies affected by the policy., Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was administered to Oregon prescribing clinicians and NPT clinicians between December 2019 and February 2020. The survey was completed by 107 prescribing clinicians and 83 NPT clinicians., Results: Prescribing clinicians and NPT clinicians had only moderate levels of familiarity with core elements of the policy. Prescribing clinicians had higher levels of frustration caring for OHP patients with back pain than NPT clinicians (83 vs. 34%, p<0.001) and were less confident in their ability to provide effective care (73 vs. 85%, p = .025). Eighty-six percent of prescribing clinicians and 83% of NPT clinicians thought active NPT treatments were effective; 74 and 70% thought passive NPT treatments were effective. Forty percent of prescribing clinicians and 25% of NPT clinicians (p<0.001) thought medically-light therapies were effective, while 29% of prescribing clinicians and 10% of NPT clinicians thought medically-intensive treatments were effective (p=0.001). Prescribing clinicians thought increased access to NPTs improved outcomes, while opinions were less consistent on the impact of restricting opioid prescribing., Conclusions: Prescribing clinicians and NPT clinicians had varying perspectives of a Medicaid coverage policy to increase evidence-based back pain care. Understanding these perspectives is important for contextualizing policy effectiveness., (© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.)

Often, there is a delay in the diagnosis of inflammatory back pain (IBP) in the primary care setting. This may be attributed to the inability of healthcare providers to distinguish between inflammatory and mechanical back pain. This study aimed to evaluate primary care physicians' current practices for assessing patients with IBP using clinical, radiographic, and laboratory tests. A questionnaire-based survey was emailed to all primary care physicians in the western region of Saudi Arabia by the Saudi Commission of Health Specialists from February to May 2021. The questionnaire included data about axial spondyloarthropathy based on the Calin, Berlin, and European Spondyloarthropathy Study Group criteria. A total of 103 primary care physicians responded who represented around 24% of primary care physicians at primary healthcare. The most often perceived IBP symptoms include a response to NSAIDs, morning stiffness lasting >30 minutes, age of onset <45 years old, duration of back pain >3 months, and improvement with exercise. The most frequently questioned patient or family history conditions were peripheral arthritis (92.2%), family history of spondyloarthritis (83.5%), and inflammatory bowel disease (97.6%). The most-reported investigations were CRP/ESR (86.4%) and spinal radiography (66%). For treatment of IBP, NSAIDs were most prescribed (48.6%), followed by physiotherapy (45.6%) and disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (41.7%). Primary care physicians were more confident in management of mechanical back pain than IBP (P < .001). Primary care physicians have good knowledge of IBP symptoms but not of disease-specific features and modest confidence in evaluating patients with IBP, indicating the need for educational programs and a more effective, feasible referral strategy., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding and conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Introduction: Isotretinoin has been reported to induce inflammatory back pain (IBP) and sacroiliitis in the patients with acne vulgaris. The aim of this study is to investigate the incidence of IBP and sacroiliitis in patients receiving isotretinoin treatment compared with oral antibiotics for acne vulgaris., Materials and Methods: A total of 201 patients with moderate-to-severe acne vulgaris who received isotretinoin (n = 100) or oral antibiotics (n = 101) were included in the study. All patients were monthly questioned for IBP symptoms during their treatment. Patients described IBP were also evaluated for sacroiliitis by c-reactive protein, sedimentation rate, HLAB27, and sacroiliac magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Isotretinoin was discontinued in all patients diagnosed as sacroiliitis, and these patients were reevaluated after 3 months., Results: IBP was observed in 21 (10.4%), and sacroiliitis was detected in 11 (11%) patients on isotretinoin treatment; in oral antibiotic group, we did not observe IBP or sacroiliitis. The incidence of IBP and sacroiliitis differed significantly between the isotretinoin and oral antibiotic groups (p < 0.0001, p = 0.02). Complete regression was observed in the great majority of patients following cessation of isotretinoin., Conclusions: Our study is the largest prospective controlled study that investigated the incidence of sacroiliitis in patients receiving isotretinoin and compared with patients using oral antibiotics., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Back pain (BP) is among the most common reasons for seeking medical attention worldwide. The nature of BP depends on the causative stimulus and its anatomical location. Clinically, BP is manifested by pain, muscle tension, and stiffness. The development of BP is a very complex, multifactorial process in which not only somatic stimuli (anatomical structures), but also psychosocial effects are involved. Using a variety of criteria, BP can be divided into specific where the cause of pain is known, nonspecific wherein the cause remains unclear, or according to its duration (i.e., acute, subacute, and chronic back pain). Simple low back pain must be distinguished from inflammatory BP. Inflammatory BP is one of the symptoms of spondyloarthritides. It is typically a resting pain of insidious onset, peaking at night or in the morning associated with morning stiffness, improved with exercise, and responding to non-steroidal antirheumatic drugs. A red-flag system was developed for the early identification of at-risk patients with a potentially severe disease presenting with BP. Early diagnosis and identification of the cause of complaints often requires multidisciplinary cooperation. The treatment involves pharmacological agents (analgesic and muscle relaxation therapies) and nonpharmacological approaches (rehabilitation, surgical intervention, etc.).

Objectives: To compare opioid prescription rates between patients enrolled in coordinated ambulatory care and patients receiving usual care., Design: In this retrospective cohort study, we analysed claims data for insured patients with non-specific/specific back pain or osteoarthritis of hip or knee from 2014 to 2017., Setting: The study was based on administrative data provided by the statutory health insurance fund 'Allgemeine Ortskrankenkasse', in the state of Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany., Participants: The intervention group consisted of patients enrolled in a coordinated ambulatory healthcare model; the control group included patients receiving usual care. Outcomes were overall strong and weak opioid prescriptions. Generalised linear regression models were used to analyse the effect of the intervention., Results: Overall, 46 001 (non-specific 18 787/specific 27 214) patients with back pain and 19 366 patients with osteoarthritis belonged to the intervention group, and 7038 (2803/4235) and 963 patients to the control group, respectively. No significant difference in opioid prescriptions existed between the groups. However, the chance of being prescribed strong opioids was significantly lower in the intervention group (non-specific back pain: Odds Ratio (OR) 0.735, 95% Confidential Interval (CI) 0.563 to 0.960; specific back pain: OR 0.702, 95% CI 0.577 to 0.852; osteoarthritis: OR 0.644, 95% CI 0.464 to 0.892). The chance of being prescribed weak opioids was significantly higher in patients with specific back pain (OR 1.243, 95% CI 1.032 to 1.497) and osteoarthritis (OR 1.493, 95% CI 1.037 to 2.149) in the intervention group., Conclusion: Coordinated ambulatory healthcare appears to be associated with a lower prescription rate for strong opioids in patients with chronic musculoskeletal disorders., Trial Registration Number: German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00017548)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)