Prospective case series of litigants and non-litigants with chronic spinal pain treated with dextrose prolotherapy

There are no files associated with this record.

Title Prospective case series of litigants and non-litigants with chronic spinal pain treated with dextrose prolotherapy
Author Hooper, R Allen; Yelland, Michael; Fonstad, Pat; Southern, Danielle
Journal Name International Musculoskeletal Medicine
Year Published 2011
Place of publication United Kingdom
Publisher Maney Publishing
Abstract Objectives To compare outcomes for litigants and non-litigants with chronic spinal pain treated with dextrose prolotherapy. Methods One hundred and forty-seven consecutive patients with chronic spinal pain were classified as litigants if they had retained a lawyer for an unresolved claim at the start of treatment, or as non-litigants if they had previously settled claims or sustained non-compensable injuries. Patients were treated with a solution of 20% dextrose and 0.75% lidocaine. One-half milliliter of proliferant was injected into facet capsules of the cervical, thoracic, or lumbar spine. The iliolumbar and dorsal sacroiliac ligaments were also injected for a total of 10 cc in low back pain patients. The Neck Disability Index, Patient Specific Functional Scale, and Roland‐Morris Disability Questionnaire scales were administered before treatment and approximately 1 year after treatment. At the 1-year follow-up, patients were also asked to rate their change in symptoms, function, ability to work, willingness to repeat treatment, and need for ongoing medications or other treatment. Results Both litigants (71) and non-litigants (76) showed significant improvement from baseline on all disability scales (P < 0.001). There were no differences in the percentage of litigants/non-litigants reporting improvement on impression of change scales for symptoms (91/92%), function (90/90%), improved ability to work (76/75%), willingness to repeat treatment (91/93%), ability to decrease medication (82/81%), and decreased need for other treatment (80/84%). Discussion Litigants and non-litigants with chronic spinal pain treated with prolotherapy showed statistically and clinically significant improvements in measures of disability, and impression of change scales. Litigation need not be an exclusion factor for future spine prolotherapy studies.
Peer Reviewed Yes
Published Yes
Alternative URI http://dx.doi.org/10.1179/1753615410Y.0000000007
Volume 33
Issue Number 1
Page from 15
Page to 20
ISSN 1753-6146
Date Accessioned 2011-08-29
Date Available 2012-02-10T02:13:35Z
Language en_US
Research Centre Centre for Musculoskeletal Research; Griffith Health Institute
Faculty Griffith Health Faculty
Subject Medical and Health Sciences
URI http://hdl.handle.net/10072/41661
Publication Type Journal Articles (Refereed Article)
Publication Type Code c1

Show simple item record

Griffith University copyright notice