Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40971109›Full record

ArticlePain and therapy2025

Practice Patterns and Perspectives on Epidural Steroid Injections by Interventional Pain Physicians.

Sara Abdullah, Jun Beom Ku, Olivia Sutton, Jatinder Gill, Robert J Yong, Omar Viswanath, Christopher L Robinson, Jamal Hasoon

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pain and therapy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

8 authors.

Sara Abdullah *Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
Jun Beom Ku *Deparment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, New York Medical College, New York, USA.
Olivia Sutton *Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
Jatinder GillDepartment of Anesthesiology, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, USA.
Robert J YongDepartment of Anesthesiology, Perioperative and Pain Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, USA.
Omar Viswanath *Creighton University School of Medicine, Phoenix, USA.
Christopher L Robinson *Department of Anesthesiology & Critical Care Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA.
Jamal Hasoon *Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Medicine, McGovern Medical School, UTHealth, 6431 Fannin, Houston, TX, 77030, USA. Jamal.J.Hasoon@uth.tmc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8227-1864

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionEpidural steroid injections (ESIs) are commonly used to manage chronic spinal pain. However, variations in ESI practices remain prevalent among interventional pain physicians. This study evaluates current practice patterns and perceptions of ESI efficacy to identify areas for potential standardization in clinical application.

methodsA structured survey was distributed to interventional pain physicians via email and social media outlets, collecting data on several aspects of ESI practice: (1) the importance of precise injectate placement, (2) perceived effectiveness for axial versus limb pain, and (3) preference for fixed versus variable injectate volume based on contrast pattern spread. Responses were collected and analyzed to understand prevailing practice trends. The survey included a diverse group of pain management physicians representing different primary specialties and practice settings.

resultsOf the 94 respondents, 77.7% (73/94) selected that precise injectate placement is crucial for optimal outcomes, while 22.3% (21/94) did not view it as essential. Regarding pain type, 61.7% (58/94) selected that ESIs help with axial and limb pain, while 36.2% (34/94) found ESIs primarily effective for limb pain. Only 1.1% (1/94) selected that ESIs were beneficial solely for axial back pain, with one respondent selecting ineffectiveness for either pain type. For injectate volume, 69.2% (65/94) selected that they use a fixed volume for injection, while 30.9% (29/94) adjusted injectate volume based on contrast spread.

conclusionThis survey highlights practice patterns among interventional pain physicians regarding ESIs, underscoring the value placed on targeted injectate placement and the perceived broad efficacy of ESIs for axial and limb pain. However, the variability in volume administration suggests a need for further research to explore the impact of fixed versus variable injectate volumes on clinical outcomes. These findings may influence future standardization efforts in ESI practice.

Indexed as

Chronic painEpidural steroid injectionsInterventional pain managementPain managementPractice parametersRadiculopathySpinal pain

Identifiers

PMID40971109
PMCPMC12635008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.