Trial reportThe Journal of international medical research2022
Evaluation of lung function and clinical features of interlaminar cervical epidural steroid injections: a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in The Journal of international medical research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveInterlaminar cervical epidural steroid injections (ICESIs) are commonly used to treat axial neck pain and cervical radicular pain. However, local anesthetics can spread to and block the phrenic nerve and upper segments of the thoracic spinal cord where the sympathetic innervation of the lungs emerges. Therefore, changes in lung function may occur following ICESIs.
methodsThe primary outcome measure was the pulmonary function test (PFT) result 30 minutes before and after ICESI with ropivacaine (0.1875% or 0.25%). The secondary outcome measure was the comparison of the pain scores and functional disability between the two concentrations of ropivacaine 4 weeks after the ICESIs.
resultsFifty patients were randomly assigned to either the R1 (0.1875% ropivacaine) or R2 (0.25% ropivacaine) group. No significant difference was observed between the pre-ICESI and 30-minute post-ICESI PFT results within each group, and no difference was observed between the two groups. After 4 weeks of treatment, both groups showed a significant decrease in pain scores and functional disability; however, no significant differences were observed between the two groups.
conclusionsThis study showed no significant change in lung function after ICESIs in either group and no local anesthetic concentration-based difference in the clinical efficacy of the ICESIs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.