View clinical trials related to Lumbar Radiculopathy.
Filter by:The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of low level laser therapy with and without proprioceptive stimulation on somatosensation, pain and gait parameters in patients with discogenic lumbar radiculopathy. The randomized central trial will recruit patients according to convenience sampling into two intervention groups randomly. One group will receive low level laser therapy and proprioceptive stimulation and other group will receive low level laser therapy alone. Heating packs will be given to both groups.
the goal of this clinical trial is to determine the effects of neural flossing with and without proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation on pain, range of motion and disability in patients with lumbar radiculopathy. the main question it aim to answer is :- Does proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation added benefit when combined with neural flossing to pain, range of motion and disability in lumbar radiculopathy patients? Research will compare the neural flossing group with the group receiving neural flossing with proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation to see if there is any difference in the outcomes.
This is a single-center, randomized, double-blind clinical study to compare patient comprehension and anxiety by comparing a traditional paper consent form to a multimedia consent form for patients undergoing transforaminal epidural steroid injection.
The goal of this Randomized controlled trial was to examine the effect of routine physical therapy with and without core stability exercises in patients with lumbar radiculopathy. The main question it aims to answer is: • To examine the effect of routine physical therapy with and without core stability exercises in patients with lumbar radiculopathy Participants after reading and signing the consent form were included in study according to eligibility criteria and were allocated in to 2 groups, the Standard Physical Therapy treatment along with core strengthening exercises. Core strengthening exercises were carried out in their respective standard positions (were modified according to patient's comfortability). We measured outcome through different outcome measure tools.
To evaluate the efficacy of usage of High-voltage pulsed radiofrequency on DRG in comparison to standard-voltage pulsed radiofrequency intervention in patients with chronic lumbosacral radicular pain
Lumbar radiculopathy is a relevant cause of disability and morbidity, accounting for between 23 and 57% of the cases of patients with low back pain and representing a significant expense due to the sick leave and health care that may be required. Nuclear magnetic resonance and electromyography are the most commonly used tests for the diagnosis of the pathology. Neurodynamic tests represent a sequence of structured movements with the purpose of increasing the mechanical stress of the neural tissue. These tests are currently an important aspect of the physical examination of the patient when there is suspicion of neural involvement, allowing the physiological and mechanical capacities of the nerve to be evaluated. The Slump and Straight Leg Raise neurodynamic tests are the two best known tests for assessing the mechanosensitivity of the sciatic nerve and its component roots. The hypothesis of this observational study is that the straight leg raising and Slump neurodynamic tests with precise diagnostic criteria are valid tools for the diagnosis of lumbar radiculopathy.
Motorized traction and non-surgical spinal decompression treatments are relatively new treatments for which there is insufficient evidence in the literature. In this study investigators aimed to retrospectively compare the effectiveness of these treatments, which are in the field of their routine practice in their clinic.
Lumbar epidural injection is used in the treatment of lumbar radicular pain. There are three different application methods: lateral parasagittal, midline interlaminar and transforaminal epidural injection. Investigator aimed to compare lateral parasagittal and transforaminal epidural injection methods. The purpose of the study is to determine which method is more efficient.
This is an observational pilot study. The spinal cord stimulator (SCS) procedure and neuromonitoring device is not under investigation. Neuromonitoring is typically performed on this patient population receiving SCS trials here. This study is collecting the data that is transmitted into EPIC from the device that is being collected as part of the patients standard of care. This study will specifically look at Boston Scientific SCS trials as those are the majority of SCS devices that are used here at this medical center Primary Objective - To evaluate the difference between observed intraoperative neuromonitoring readings and patient reported coverage for spinal cord stimulator trials and Secondary Objective(s) - 1. To evaluate the safety and tolerability of intraoperative neuromonitoring during spinal cord stimulator trials and via documented adverse events and patient elicited feedback on follow up questionnaires. 2. Patient satisfaction using PGIC from one week to 6-months post procedure 3. Change in pain intensity using NRS from baseline to 6-months post procedure This study will follow subjects in conjunction with thier standard of care SCS clinic visits. This includes the one week wound check at the pain clinic and then a 2 week end of study phone call.
The association between lumbosacral radiculopathy and the ipsilateral gluteal trigger point has been demonstrated in 74% of previous studies in patients with chronic low back pain. It has also been found to be associated with lumbosacral radiculopathy, central sensitization and myofascial pain in previous studies. From these data, it can be hypothesized that the presence of a myofascial trigger point in the relevant muscle segment may alter the efficacy of the transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) procedure used in the treatment of lumbosacral radiculopathy. We could not find any study on this subject in the literature. Although the most accurate level for the TFESI procedure is determined according to the patient's examination and imaging findings, patients may not benefit from the procedure sufficiently due to the trigger points on the same side as the radicular pain before the procedure. Another hypothesis is that active trigger points will transform into latent or normal tissue after the TFESI procedure and patients will benefit significantly. This assumption will provide insight into the possible underlying mechanism in some patients who do not benefit from the TFESI procedure. If the active trigger points become latent or there is a significant change in the pressure pain threshold after the TFESI procedure, the formation mechanism of the trigger points will be understood. TFESI is one of the procedures routinely applied to patients diagnosed with lumbosacral radiculopathy in investigator's clinic. Among the patients who are planned to undergo TFESI procedure, those who are suitable for our study will be selected. Data such as demographic characteristics, height, weight, which leg the pain is reflected in, additional diseases, medications, the stage of the disc herniation, pressure on which nerve root, presence and number of active trigger points, muscles will be recorded before the procedure. Numerical Rating Scale (NRS), Short Form-12, Central Sensitivity Inventory (CSI), Doulour Neuropathic 4 (DN4), 6-point Likert Scale, Jenkins Sleep Scale, Istanbul Low Back Pain Disability Index, Pressure Pain Threshold (active trigger points will be evaluated with an algometer) will be applied to the patients before the procedure. The patients will be evaluated for the presence of active trigger points before the procedure and the patients will be divided into 2 groups as those with active trigger points and those without. The same procedure will be applied to both groups as planned before inclusion of the patients in the study, in the same way as the patients ineligible for the study. Patients will be re-evaluated with the scales and methods mentioned above at the 3rd week, 3rd and 6th months after the first procedure. TFESI procedure will be performed again in the 3rd week and 3rd month for the patients whose NRS values decrease less than 50 percent after the previous procedure.