ArticleInterventional pain medicine2024
Evaluating the effectiveness of interlaminar epidural steroid injections for cervical radiculopathy using PROMIS as an outcome measure.
Article in Interventional pain medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical Outcomes of Two Institution-Specific Cervicothoracic Interlaminar Epidural Steroid Injection Protocols (C7/T1-6 mL vs. T1/T2-8 mL) in Cervical Radiculopathy: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Evaluation of fluoroscopically guided transforaminal epidural steroid injections for cervical radiculopathy utilizing patient reported outcome measurement information system as an outcome measure.Interventional pain medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Cervical interlaminar epidural steroid injections (CIESI) are frequently used to treat cervical radiculopathy due to cervical nerve root impingement. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic effect of CIESI for patients with cervical radiculopathy. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of consecutive adult patients with cervical radicular pain and corroborative cervical spondylotic foraminal stenosis on MRI that failed at least 6 weeks of conservative management consisting of medication and physical rehabilitation seen at a multidisciplinary, tertiary academic spine center. Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS) domains of Physical Function (PF) v1.2/v2.0 and Pain Interference (PI) v1.1 were collected at all patient visits. Scores were recorded at baseline, 3-months, 6-months and 12-months post-procedure. Statistical analysis comparing baseline scores with follow-up postprocedural PROMIS scores was performed. The percentage of patients reporting improvement greater than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was calculated for responders and for the worst case scenario. Results: 179 patients met inclusion criteria. PROMIS PI at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up statistically improved by 1.5 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.4-1.6; p = 0.02), 1.5 (95 % CI 1.4-1.6; p = 0.03) and 1.7 (95 % CI 1.6-1.8; p = 0.4), respectively. Follow-up PROMIS PF at 3-month follow-up improved by 1.6 (95 % CI 1.5-1.7; p = 0.04) but did not significantly differ at 6- or 12-month follow-up. The percentage of patients that exceeded MCID thresholds of clinical significance was 44 % (95 % CI 36%-53 %) at 3-months, 49 % (95 % CI 39%-59 %) at 6-months, and 54 % (95 % CI 41%-66 %) at 12-months. Worst case scenario analysis demonstrated that 32 % (95 % CI 36%-53 %) of patients exceeded the MCID thresholds at 3-months, 31 % (95 % CI 24%-37 %) at 6-months, and 21 % (95 % CI 15%-27 %) at 12-months. Discussion/conclusions: Our study demonstrated that CIESI leads to an improvement in function and pain for patients with cervical radiculopathy. This study was limited by retrospective design, loss to follow-up, and variation in steroids used.
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.