Effect of Facet Joint Injection Versus Systemic Steroids in Low Back Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial. OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of facet joint injection versus systemic steroid in patients with a diagnosis of facet joint syndrome. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The term facet joint syndrome has been used to define back pain originating from the facet joints. Treatment is mainly conservative, although interventions, including intra-articular injections and medial branch nerve blocks are used to manage facet-mediated pain. Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness of these interventions. Results of facet joint injection, however, are conflicting. METHODS: Sixty subjects with a diagnosis of facet joint syndrome were enrolled in the study. They were randomized into experimental and control groups. The experimental group was administered with intra-articular injection of 6 lumbar facet joints with triamcinolone hexacetonide; the control group was administered with triamcinolone acetonide intramuscular injection of 6 lumbar paravertebral points. Visits were taken at baseline and at 1, 4, 12, and 24 weeks after interventions. Outcome measures were used: pain visual analogue scale, pain visual analogue scale during extension of the spine, Likert scale, improvement percentage scale, Roland-Morris, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, and accountability of medications taken.Homogeneity was tested using the Student t, Pearson χ, and Mann-Whitney tests. Analysis of variance was used to analyze differences in the groups over time and the Student t test to analyze differences between groups at each time evaluation. RESULTS: The groups were similar at baseline. Comparisons between the groups showed, in analysis of variance analysis, an improvement in the experimental group regarding diclofenac intake and quality of life, in the "role physical" profile, assessed by 36-Item Short Form Health Survey.In the analysis at each time point, an improvement in the experimental group was also found in the Roland-Morris questionnaire, in the improvement percentage scale and in the response to treatment, assessed by the Likert scale. CONCLUSION: Both treatments were effective, with a slight superiority of the intra-articular injection of steroids over intramuscular injection.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".