4.4 Article

Chronic Whiplash Associated Disorders (WAD): Responses to Nerve Blocks of Cervical Zygapophyseal Joints

Journal

PAIN MEDICINE
Volume 17, Issue 12, Pages 2162-2175

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnw036

Keywords

Whiplash Associated Disorders; Zygapophyseal Joint; Medial Branch; Nerve Block; Neck Pain; Placebo

Funding

  1. Medical Research Council of Southeast Sweden

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. This study explores the prevalence of facet joint pain in chronic Whiplash Associated Disorder (WAD). Design. Forty-seven patients with chronic WAD were scheduled for medial branch blocks of the cervical spine. Methods. The patient's localization of the pain together with established pain maps guided to the first level of zygapophyseal joint to be tested. The joint was anesthetized by injecting bupivacaine (0.5 ml; 5 mg/ml) to the medial branches of the cervical dorsal rami above and below the joint. If a positive response was noted, the schedule continued with a double-blinded sequence with a placebo (saline) and bupivacaine. If a negative response was noted, other joint levels were anesthetized until all joints from C2 to C7 were tested. The responses were assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) in a predefined protocol. The study was carried through with a definition of a positive response to a diagnostic block as a VAS decrease >= 50% compared with baseline during a minimum of 3 hours after the block. All other responses were regarded as negative. The data were also analyzed using a definition of a positive response as a VAS decrease >= 80%, and figures from this analysis are presented as the main result of the study. Results. The study yielded 29% true positive responders, 60% non-responders, and 11% placebo responders. Conclusions. A substantial amount of patients with chronic WAD have their persistent pain emanating from cervical zygapophyseal joints.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available