Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39286465›Full record

ArticleOrthopedic reviews2024

Practice Patterns of Physicians who Perform Caudal Epidural Steroid Injections.

Ashlyn Brown, Jason Parmar, Suma Ganji-Angirekula, Christopher L Robinson, Rana Al-Jumah, Jatinder Gill, Jamal Hasoon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Ashlyn BrownH. Ben Taub Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Baylor College of Medicine.
Jason ParmarH. Ben Taub Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Baylor College of Medicine.
Suma Ganji-AngirekulaDepartment of Emergency Medicine The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.
Christopher L RobinsonDepartment of Anesthesiology, Perioperative, and Pain Medicine Harvard Medical School, Brigham and Women's Hospital.
Rana Al-JumahDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine University of Washington.
Jatinder GillDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
Jamal HasoonDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8227-1864

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Caudal epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are commonly employed in the management of low back pain and radiculopathy. Despite their widespread use, practice patterns among physicians performing caudal ESIs can vary significantly. This study aims to identify variability in injection techniques utilized by physicians during caudal ESIs, focusing on steroid use, needle selection, and catheter use. This study also looks at major permanent neurological injuries related to caudal ESIs. Methods: A survey was distributed to a cohort of physicians who regularly perform ESIs. The survey comprised questions regarding the type of needle primarily used, steroid selection, the use of catheters, and major neurological injuries from caudal ESIs. The respondents included a diverse group of pain management physicians from various specialties and practice settings. Results: The results revealed a predominant preference for the use of particulate steroids (72.41%) when performing caudal ESIs. Additionally, physicians primarily prefer to use spinal needles (72.41%) compared to other needle types. A majority of physicians (65.12%) reported that they never use a catheter when performing caudal ESIs to access higher pathology. Finally, all physician responders (100%) reported that they have never caused a permanent neurological injury when performing a caudal ESI. Conclusion: This survey provides initial data among physicians who perform caudal ESIs. Our results demonstrate the majority of physicians favor using particulate steroids and a spinal needle, with fewer opting to use a catheter during these procedures. There were no reported major permanent neurological injuries, demonstrating that caudal ESIs are a safe interventional option for managing lumbosacral pain complaints.

Indexed as

Caudal epidural steroid injectionchronic painepidural steroid injectioninterventional pain managementlumbar radiculopathysciatica

Identifiers

PMID39286465
PMCPMC11405026

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.