Scholarlink

Introduction <p>Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are commonly used to manage chronic spinal pain. However, variations in ESI practices remain prevalent among interventional pain physicians. This study evaluates current practice patterns and perceptions of ESI efficacy to identify areas for potential standardization in clinical application.</p> Methods <p>A structured survey was distributed to interventional pain physicians via email and social media outlets, collecting data on several aspects of ESI practice: (1) the importance of precise injectate placement, (2) perceived effectiveness for axial versus limb pain, and (3) preference for fixed versus variable injectate volume based on contrast pattern spread. Responses were collected and analyzed to understand prevailing practice trends. The survey included a diverse group of pain management physicians representing different primary specialties and practice settings.</p> Results <p>Of the 94 respondents, 77.7% (73/94) selected that precise injectate placement is crucial for optimal outcomes, while 22.3% (21/94) did not view it as essential. Regarding pain type, 61.7% (58/94) selected that ESIs help with axial and limb pain, while 36.2% (34/94) found ESIs primarily effective for limb pain. Only 1.1% (1/94) selected that ESIs were beneficial solely for axial back pain, with one respondent selecting ineffectiveness for either pain type. For injectate volume, 69.2% (65/94) selected that they use a fixed volume for injection, while 30.9% (29/94) adjusted injectate volume based on contrast spread.</p> Conclusion <p>This survey highlights practice patterns among interventional pain physicians regarding ESIs, underscoring the value placed on targeted injectate placement and the perceived broad efficacy of ESIs for axial and limb pain. However, the variability in volume administration suggests a need for further research to explore the impact of fixed versus variable injectate volumes on clinical outcomes. These findings may influence future standardization efforts in ESI practice.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Practice Patterns and Perspectives on Epidural Steroid Injections by Interventional Pain Physicians

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月19日

查看全文
  • Sara Abdullah,
  • Jun Beom Ku,
  • Olivia Sutton,
  • Jatinder Gill,
  • Robert J. Yong,
  • Omar Viswanath,
  • Christopher L. Robinson,
  • Jamal Hasoon

摘要

Introduction

Epidural steroid injections (ESIs) are commonly used to manage chronic spinal pain. However, variations in ESI practices remain prevalent among interventional pain physicians. This study evaluates current practice patterns and perceptions of ESI efficacy to identify areas for potential standardization in clinical application.

Methods

A structured survey was distributed to interventional pain physicians via email and social media outlets, collecting data on several aspects of ESI practice: (1) the importance of precise injectate placement, (2) perceived effectiveness for axial versus limb pain, and (3) preference for fixed versus variable injectate volume based on contrast pattern spread. Responses were collected and analyzed to understand prevailing practice trends. The survey included a diverse group of pain management physicians representing different primary specialties and practice settings.

Results

Of the 94 respondents, 77.7% (73/94) selected that precise injectate placement is crucial for optimal outcomes, while 22.3% (21/94) did not view it as essential. Regarding pain type, 61.7% (58/94) selected that ESIs help with axial and limb pain, while 36.2% (34/94) found ESIs primarily effective for limb pain. Only 1.1% (1/94) selected that ESIs were beneficial solely for axial back pain, with one respondent selecting ineffectiveness for either pain type. For injectate volume, 69.2% (65/94) selected that they use a fixed volume for injection, while 30.9% (29/94) adjusted injectate volume based on contrast spread.

Conclusion

This survey highlights practice patterns among interventional pain physicians regarding ESIs, underscoring the value placed on targeted injectate placement and the perceived broad efficacy of ESIs for axial and limb pain. However, the variability in volume administration suggests a need for further research to explore the impact of fixed versus variable injectate volumes on clinical outcomes. These findings may influence future standardization efforts in ESI practice.