View clinical trials related to Lumbar Spine Injury.
Filter by:The goal of this clinical trial is to test in the effects of pain pressure threshold (PPT) looking out to 30 minutes in the lumbar spine. The main question[s] it aims to answer are: • Is there a difference between PPT from baseline, immediately after, or 30 minutes after compared to sham ultrasound control group? Participants will be exposed to sham ultrasound or sidelying lumbar manipulation with between groups and within group comparisons of PPT at the posterior superior iliac spine up to 30 minutes following the intervention.
The purpose of this study, entitled "Delivering Transcutaneous Auricular Neurostimulation as an Adjunct Non-Opioid Pain Management Therapy for Patients Undergoing Lumbar Fusion Surgery", is to demonstrate whether transcutaneous auricular neurostimulation (tAN) can non-invasively reduce the perception of pain in patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery. tAN is placed on and around the ear to non-invasively stimulate branches of the vagus and trigeminal nerves and modulate specific brain regions associated with pain.
A novel prehabilitation method has been implemented at our institution to decrease perioperative outcome complications for frail complex spine fusion surgery patients. The goal of this randomized trial is to evaluate whether this prehabilitation program improves preoperative functional status of frail spine disease patients and benefits patients in their postsurgical outcomes.
Unrecognized abdominal and pelvic injuries can result in catastrophic disability and death. Sporadic reports of "occult" injuries have generated concern, and physicians, fearing that they may miss such an injury, have adopted the practice of obtaining computed tomography on virtually all patients with significant blunt trauma. This practice exposes large numbers patients to dangerous radiation at considerable expense, while detecting injuries in a small minority of cases. Existing data suggest that a limited number of criteria can reliably identify blunt injury victims who have "no risk" of abdominal or pelvic injuries, and hence no need for computed tomography (CT), without misidentifying any injured patient. It is estimated that nationwide implementation of such criteria could result in an annual reduction in radiographic charges of $75 million, and a significant decrease in radiation exposure and radiation induced malignancies. This study seeks to determine whether "low risk" criteria can reliably identify patients who have sustained significant abdominal or pelvic injuries and safely decrease CT imaging of blunt trauma patients. This goal will be accomplished in the following manner: All blunt trauma victims undergoing computed tomography of the abdomen/pelvis in the emergency department will undergo routine clinical evaluations prior to radiographic imaging. Based on these examinations, the presence or absence of specific clinical findings (i.e. abdominal/pelvic/flank pain, abdominal/pelvic/flank tenderness, bruising abrasions, distention, hip pain, hematuria, hypotension, tachycardia, low or falling hematocrit, intoxication, altered sensorium, distracting injury, positive FAST imaging, dangerous mechanism, abnormal x-ray imaging) will be recorded for each patient, as will the presence or absence of abdominal or pelvic injuries. The clinical findings will serve as potential imaging criteria. At the completion of the derivation portion of the study the criteria will be examined to find a subset that predicts injury with high sensitivity, while simultaneously excluding injury, and hence the need for imaging, in the remaining patients. These criteria will then be confirmed in a separate validation phase of the study. The criteria will be considered to be reliable if the lower statistical confidence limit for the measured sensitivity exceeds 98.0%. Potential reductions in CT imaging will be estimated by determining the proportion of "low-risk" patients that do not have significant abdominal or pelvic injuries.
The purpose of this study is to determine whether administration of a non-centrally acting muscle relaxants will improve the Overall Benefit of Analgesia Score (OBAS), and Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) scores in patients undergoing lumbar fusion.
Low back pain is a common symptom, which often affects the adult population. Studies show that over the past two decades, costs related to spinal surgery have increased significantly, leading to speculation about what would be motivating this phenomenon. Although expenses with physical therapy treatments and less invasive surgical procedures remained relatively stable, the amount spent with more complex spine surgeries increased exponentially until they became the procedures with the highest costs in healthcare. The criteria for surgical indication are not uniform among surgeons and therefore a study of second opinion in spine surgeries is urgently needed. The present study aims to 1) quantify cost-effectiveness of second opinion for patients with spinal surgery indication 2) evaluate effectiveness of conservative and surgical treatment for degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine 3) define objective criteria for indication of conservative and surgical treatment using evidence-based medicine 4) evaluate prognosis of biological markers in the follow-up of patients with lumbar affections 5) evaluate interobserver agreement of physicians in relation to the diagnoses and treatment proposals in patients with diseases of the lumbar spine 6) verify effectiveness of patients who were operated on, compared to patients who were not operated. A prospective cohort study will be conducted, in which patients with an indication of surgical spinal treatment will be evaluated for a second opinion. First evaluation diagnoses and indications for patient treatment will be compared with the second opinion evaluation. All patients who choose to participate on the study will be followed up for a year for evaluations concerning cost-effectiveness, pain, quality of life, function and blood biomarkers. The outcomes will be compared using linear or generalized mixed models and descriptive analyzes of the study population program will be carried out; Statistical agreement will be observed between the first and second opinion and also patient acceptance rates for the treatment proposed in the second indication, evaluating the validity of the project approach. A five-year budget impact analysis will also be carried out, taking into account the population who was eligible for treatment according to the admission flow of a private outpatient setting.