4.2 Article

The effectiveness of transforaminal epidural steroid injections on radicular pain, functionality, psychological status and sleep quality in patients with lumbar disc herniation

期刊

出版社

IOS PRESS
DOI: 10.3233/BMR-150438

关键词

TFESI; lumbar disc herniation; radicular pain; functionality; sleep quality; depressive symptoms

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: The significance of fluoroscopy-guided transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) in the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) is well known. The aim of our study is to investigate the effectiveness of TFESI on radicular pain, functionality, psychological status, and sleep quality in patients with LDH. METHODS: Seventy-five LDH patients (36 males, 39 females) were enrolled in the study. All patients received a fluoroscopically guided TFESI (betamethasone 40 mg, lidocaine 2%). Also all patients were evaluated according to (with the visual analogue scale) radicular pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), hospital axiety and depression scale, and Pittsburgh sleep quality index (PSQI) at baseline, at two weeks, and 12 months post injections. RESULTS: Mean age was 46.4 +/- 12.5. When compared to baseline measurements there were significant improvements in radicular pain, ODI, modified schober, Laseque angle, finger to floor distance, depressive symptoms and PSQI scores at two weeks and 12 months after injection. Improvement of at least 50% in radicular pain relief, ODI score and sleep quality index was detected at two weeks 83%, 71%, 69% respectively. This rate showed regression at 12 months of 73%, 65% and 62% respectively. Duration of symptoms was significantly negatively correlated with changes in scores of radicular pain, ODI, depressive symptoms, and PSQI. There were no significant correlations with symptom duration and anxious symptoms. CONCLUSION: Fluoroscopy guided TFESI had positive effects on radicular pain, functionality, depressive symptoms and sleep quality in management of LDH.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据