MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014599687 · doi:10.1097/brs.0b013e3182a76df1

Effect of Facet Joint Injection Versus Systemic Steroids in Low Back Pain

2013· article· en· W2014599687 on OpenAlexaff
Luiza Helena Ribeiro, Rita Nely Vilar Furtado, Monique Sayuri Konai, Ana Beatriz Andreo, André Rosenfeld, Jamil Natour

Bibliographic record

VenueSpine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFacet jointVisual analogue scaleFacet (psychology)Physical therapyTriamcinolone acetonideLow back painRandomized controlled trialLumbarBack painAnesthesiaSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.764
Threshold uncertainty score0.765

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpineSame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207