Journal
JOURNAL OF PAIN
Volume 17, Issue 5, Pages 569-576Publisher
CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpain.2016.01.469
Keywords
Randomized clinical trial; paraspinous lidocaine injection; nonspecific chronic low back pain; evidence-based medicine; central sensitization
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
In this large, sham-controlled, randomized trial, we examined the efficacy of the combination of standard treatment and paraspinous lidocaine injection compared with standard therapy alone in subjects with chronic low back pain. There is little research-based evidence for the routine clinical use of paraspinous lidocaine injection for low back pain. A total of 378 subjects with nonspecific chronic low back pain were randomized to 3 groups: paraspinous lidocaine injection, analgesics, and exercises (group 1, LID-INJ); sham paraspinous lidocaine injection, analgesics, and exercises (group 2, SH-INJ); and analgesics and exercises (group 3, STD-TTR). A blinded rater assessed the study outcomes at 3 time points: baseline, after treatment, and after 3 months of follow-up. There were increased frequency of pain responses and better low back functional scores in the LID-INJ group compared with the SH-INJ and STD-TTR groups. These effects remained at the 3-month follow-up but differed between all 3 groups. There were significant changes in pain threshold immediately after treatment, supporting the effects of this intervention in reducing central sensitization. Paraspinous lidocaine injection therapy is not associated with a higher risk of adverse effects compared with conventional treatment and sham injection. Its effects on hyperalgesia might correlate with changes in central sensitization. (C) 2016 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of the American Pain Society
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available