ReviewThe journal of pain2026
De-implementing spinal injections in pursuit of value-based care: Rethinking pain relief.
Review in The journal of pain, 2026. 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.
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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite guideline recommendations to the contrary, patients experiencing low back pain are commonly exposed to low-value care. Spinal injections for chronic low back pain are a key example of this disconnect. Their persistence highlights the broader challenge of removing low-value practices in pain care. Low-value interventions rarely fade with the introduction of new treatments; rather, their continued use reflects entrenched reimbursement incentives, provider training norms, and patient expectations. This Focus Article applies implementation science concepts to examine spinal injections as an obvious candidate for de-implementation away from existing practice patterns. Evidence of limited effectiveness and risks is summarized, alongside multilevel determinants that sustain ongoing use at the provider, patient, organizational, and system levels. A range of strategies is mapped to guide change and a four-step roadmap is presented to operationalize these concepts. Embedding de-implementation of spinal injections alongside implementation efforts for other pain management options reframes change as an intentional redesign of care delivery rather than a withdrawal of treatment. By redirecting resources away from ineffective procedures and toward evidence-based alternatives, de-implementation offers a proactive pathway to improve outcomes, enhance equity, reduce waste, and strengthen patient trust in pain management. PERSPECTIVE: This article applies an implementation science lens to spinal injections for chronic low back pain. By outlining barriers, strategies, and describing a practical roadmap, it reframes de-implementation as a proactive quality improvement approach that offers other viable treatment options while redirecting resources towards higher value treatment options for pain management.
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.