View clinical trials related to Lumbar Radiculopathy.
Filter by:Low back pain (LBP) is a common condition and has a significant impact on the individual in terms of pain and disability. Lumbar radiculopathy occurs often with LBP and may be the result of a lumbar herniated disc which will irritate a lumbar nerve trunk resulting in intraneural inflammation. There is evidence supporting the use of manual therapies of lumbar radiculopathy. One potential manual therapy is neurodynamic mobilization technique. No scientific evidence, based on a RCT, exists that this particular approach is beneficial for individuals with LBP and lumbar radiculopathy
The specific aim of this study is to conduct a prospective, multicenter cohort study over four months to compare the cost of standard of allopathic care (control group, N=90) versus standard of care plus osteopathic manipulative treatment (experimental group, N=90) in a cohort of 180 consecutive patients seeking treatment for chronic low back pain at three osteopathic clinics and three allopathic medical clinics (offering only standard care) located in three different regions of the United States.
Treatment of chronic low-back pain with low-dose naltrexone and acetaminophen combination: a small, randomized, double-Blind, and placebo-controlled clinical trial with an open-label extension for none-responders
The purpose of this study is to determine if light sedation with spinal anesthesia reduces the incidence of delirium compared to receiving general anesthesia during spinal surgery in older adults.
The primary scientific objective of the study entails examining whether perioperative pain neuroscience education (PPNE or 'brain school') is more effective than classical back school in reducing pain and improving pain inhibition in patients undergoing surgery for spinal radiculopathy. A secondary objective implies examining whether PPNE is more effective than classical back school in imparting a behavioural change (i.e. decreasing postoperative healthcare expenditure for lumbar radiculopathy), improving functioning in daily life and improving surgical experience (=better prepared for surgery, surgery meeting their expectations) in patients undergoing surgery for spinal radiculopathy.
In this study, we are attempting to determine which factors are associated with interventional treatment outcome for LBP (and to what extent). Up to 346 patients with LBP who are considered to be good candidates for therapeutic interventional procedures will be given a complete history and physical exam, which includes the assessment of Waddell signs, and querying them regarding factors shown in non-interventional studies or retrospective studies evaluating interventional treatments to be associated with negative treatment outcomes. These factors include the presence of Waddell and other physical exam signs, opioid use, allergies, psychopathology, concomitant pain conditions, a 6-point Likert scale on expectations, sleep abnormalities, secondary gain (e.g. medical board or litigation), procedure-related pain including from a 1 ml standardized injection, obesity, and smoking history. They will then proceed to undergo their scheduled intervention, which will be limited to epidural steroid injections (ESI), facet blocks and if positive, radiofrequency denervation, and sacroiliac (SI) joint injections. A positive outcome will be defined as 2-point or greater decrease in average pain score at 1-month and a score of > 3 on a 1-5 Likert satisfaction scale. Those with a positive outcome at 1-month will remain in the study and be followed again at 3-months.
The present study aims to compare directly the efficacy of two noninvasive neurostimulation techniques : repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation and transcranial direct electrical current of the motor cortex in patients with chronic lumbar radiculopathy on pain intensity.
The objective of this study is to determine if surgery is superior to non-operative care for sciatica caused by a lumbar disc herniation. This study will include patients that have had severe sciatica for greater than 4 months which reflects the wait time of the Canadian health care system. This study is an opportunity to make an important contribution to medical science as there is no "top tier" evidence for or against this highly prevalent surgery. Although there have been several recent randomized trials in the field, all have been marred by a large number of patient crossing over from non-operative to operative treatment. Due to the wait for spine surgery, the Canadian system has a built-in delay that prevents such a cross over of patients. This study capitalizes on this unique opportunity to perform a high caliber surgical trial. Patients consenting to be in the study will be randomly assigned to expedited surgery within three weeks or standardized non-operative care while they wait on the surgeons list for consultation and then surgery (minimum wait of 9 months). The study will assess pain, function, quality of life, satisfaction, and work status to determine if one treatment is superior.