↓ Skip to main content

Controlled medial branch anesthetic block in the diagnosis of chronic lumbar facet joint pain: the value of a three-month follow-up

Overview of attention for article published in Clinics, August 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (80th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
9 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Controlled medial branch anesthetic block in the diagnosis of chronic lumbar facet joint pain: the value of a three-month follow-up
Published in
Clinics, August 2014
DOI 10.6061/clinics/2014(08)05
Pubmed ID
Authors

ID Rocha, AF Cristante, RM Marcon, RP Oliveira, OB Letaif, TE Barros Filho

Abstract

To verify the incidence of facetary and low back pain after a controlled medial branch anesthetic block in a three-month follow-up and to verify the correlation between the positive results and the demographic variables. Patients with chronic lumbar pain underwent a sham blockade (with a saline injection) and then a controlled medial branch block. Their symptoms were evaluated before and after the sham injection and after the real controlled medial branch block; the symptoms were reevaluated after one day and one week, as well as after one, two and three months using the visual analog scale. We searched for an association between the positive results and the demographic characteristics of the patients. A total of 104 controlled medial branch blocks were performed and 54 patients (52%) demonstrated >50% improvements in pain after the blockade. After three months, lumbar pain returned in only 18 individuals, with visual analogue scale scores >4. Therefore, these patients were diagnosed with chronic facet low back pain. The three-months of follow-up after the controlled medial branch block excluded 36 patients (67%) with false positive results. The results of the controlled medial branch block were not correlated to sex, age, pain duration or work disability but were correlated with patient age (p<0.05). Patient diagnosis with a controlled medial branch block proved to be effective but was not associated with any demographic variables. A three-month follow-up is required to avoid a high number of false positives.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 63 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 8 13%
Other 6 9%
Researcher 6 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Other 16 25%
Unknown 18 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 11%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Social Sciences 1 2%
Psychology 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 21 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 June 2017.
All research outputs
#4,767,040
of 17,364,317 outputs
Outputs from Clinics
#119
of 533 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#63,703
of 233,774 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinics
#5
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,364,317 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 533 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 233,774 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.