Interventional techniques: evidence-based practice guidelines in the management of chronic spinal pain

MV Boswell, AM Trescot, S Datta, DM Schultz… - Pain …, 2007 - search.proquest.com
MV Boswell, AM Trescot, S Datta, DM Schultz, HC Hansen, S Abdi, N Sehgal, RV Shah…
Pain physician, 2007search.proquest.com
Background: The evidence-based practice guidelines for the management of chronic spinal
pain with interventional techniques were developed to provide recommendations to
clinicians in the United States. Objective: To develop evidence-based clinical practice
guidelines for interventional techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic spinal
pain, utilizing all types of evidence and to apply an evidence-based approach, with broad
representation by specialists from academic and clinical practices. Design: Study design …
Abstract
Background: The evidence-based practice guidelines for the management of chronic spinal pain with interventional techniques were developed to provide recommendations to clinicians in the United States.
Objective: To develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for interventional techniques in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic spinal pain, utilizing all types of evidence and to apply an evidence-based approach, with broad representation by specialists from academic and clinical practices.
Design: Study design consisted of formulation of essentials of guidelines and a series of potential evidence linkages representing conclusions and statements about relationships between clinical interventions and outcomes.
Methods: The elements of the guideline preparation process included literature searches, literature synthesis, systematic review, consensus evaluation, open forum presentation, and blinded peer review. Methodologic quality evaluation criteria utilized included the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) criteria, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) criteria, and Cochrane review criteria. The designation of levels of evidence was from Level I (conclusive), Level II (strong), Level III (moderate), Level IV (limited), to Level V (indeterminate).
Results: Among the diagnostic interventions, the accuracy of facet joint nerve blocks is strong in the diagnosis of lumbar and cervical facet joint pain, whereas, it is moderate in the diagnosis of thoracic facet joint pain. The evidence is strong for lumbar discography, whereas, the evidence is limited for cervical and thoracic discography. The evidence for transforaminal epidural injections or selective nerve root blocks in the preoperative evaluation of patients with negative or inconclusive imaging studies is moderate. The evidence for diagnostic sacroiliac joint injections is limited.
ProQuest