Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| United States Naval Medical Center, Portsmouth | FED |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this research project is to compare two different techniques for performing an injection of the sacroiliac joint. Although both techniques are safe and accurate, the goal of the study is to determine if one technique is better than the other with respect to improvement in a patient's pain, function, and his or her satisfaction. Additionally, the investigators want to determine if one technique is quicker and more efficient than the other.
Sacroiliac joint dysfunction is a source of low back pain that causes significant pain and disability. Injection of the sacroiliac joint with a local anesthetic/corticosteroid mixture has shown efficacy in treating this condition, when conservative therapy fails. The use of fluoroscopic guidance and anatomic landmarks are traditional methods for performing this injection; however, ultrasound imaging has recently been utilized for performing this procedure. Although studies exist that describe and validate the ultrasound technique, no studies exist that compare the techniques with respect to short-term and long-term outcomes. In this study, the primary objective is to determine if a difference exists between a fluoroscopic-guided technique and ultrasound-guided technique with respect to pain and function. A secondary objective is to compare the two techniques with respect to procedural characteristics.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fluoroscopic Guidance | Active Comparator | Patients referred to the Naval Medical Center-San Diego Pain Medicine Clinic. Need a history and physical showing objective findings of sacroiliac joint (SIJ) dysfunction. If the patient meets inclusion / exclusion criteria, they will be presented with the study. After accepting and being consented, they will then be scheduled. The day of the appointment they will be randomised to Group A or B. In Group A : Fluoroscopy will be used to Guide Needle Placement to inject Steroid into joint. Then complete the multidimensional pain inventory (MPI) and rate their pain on the NRS from 0-11. After procedure, they will rate their pain from 0-10 in the recovery area and then be discharged to home. They will complete an MPI, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), numerical rating scale (NRS), and adverse events questionnaire 1-2 weeks post-procedure and 3 months post-procedure. |
|
| Ultrasound Guidance | Experimental | Patients referred to the Naval Medical Center-San Diego Pain Medicine Clinic. Need a history and physical showing objective findings of SIJ dysfunction. If the patient meets inclusion / exclusion criteria, they will be presented with the study. After accepting and being consented, they will then be scheduled. The day of the appointment they will be randomised to Group A or B. In Group B Ultrasound will be used to Guide Needle Placement to inject steroid into joint. Then complete the MPI and rate their pain on the NRS from 0-11. After procedure, they will rate their pain from 0-10 in the recovery area and then be discharged to home. They will complete an MPI, Patient Global Impression of Change (PIGC), NRS, and adverse events questionnaire 1-2 weeks post-procedure and 3 months post-procedure. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Active comparator: Fluoroscopic Guided SIJ injection | Procedure |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Difference in Minutes Between a Sacroiliac Joint Injection Done With Ultrasound vs Fluoroscopy | during procedure from the time monitors are placed on patient to the time of withdrawal of needle from skin | difference in minutes between a sacroiliac joint injection, an expected average of 9 minutes |
| Change in Pain Score From Baseline to 30 Minutes Pre-procedure Using the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DoD/VA PRS) 0-10 | Study subjects rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 (0=no pain, 10= the highest level of pain experienced), hence the lower the score the better the outcome. | 30 minutes pre-procedure minus baseline |
| Change in Pain Score From Baseline to 2 Weeks Post-procedure Using the DoD/VA PRS | Study subjects rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 (0=no pain, 10= the highest level of pain experienced), hence the lower the score the better the outcome. | 2 weeks post-procedure minus baseline |
| Change in Pain Score From Baseline to 3 Months Post-procedure Using the DoD/VA PRS | Study subjects rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 (0=no pain, 10= the highest level of pain experienced), hence the lower the score the better the outcome. | 3 months post-procedure minus baseline |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Impression of Change of Condition at 2 Weeks Post-procedure Using the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scale | Study subjects rate their change in overall condition on a scale of 0-6 (0=no change, 6=better and a definite improvement that has made a real worthwhile difference). The range of the change in pain for both groups observed was in fact 0-5. | 2 weeks post-procedure |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Diagnosis of SIJ dysfunction by history and physical exam
Failed a trial of conservative therapy which may included medications, physical therapy, or both
Age > 18
Patient agrees to participate in study
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Steven R Hanling, MD | United States Naval Medical Center, San Diego | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pain Medicine Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Naval Medical Center, San Diego | San Diego | California | 92134 | United States |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Fluoroscopic Guidance | In Group A : Fluoroscopy will be used to Guide Needle Placement to inject Steroid into joint.
|
| FG001 |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Ultrasound Guided Sacroiliac Joint Injection | Procedure |
|
|
| Havel's Inc. EchoStim (facet tip) 21 Gauge 4" needle | Device |
|
| SonoSite S-nerve | Device |
|
| iohexol | Device |
|
| triamcinolone/lidocaine | Drug |
|
| Impression of Change of Condition at 3 Months Post-procedure Using the PGIC Scale | Study subjects rate their change in overall condition on a scale of 0-6 (0=no change, 6=better and a definite improvement that has made a real worthwhile difference). The range of the change in pain for both groups observed was in fact 0-5. | 3 months post-procedure |
| Change in Pain Score Since Sacroiliac (SI) Injection at 2 Weeks Post-procedure Using the DoD/VA PRS | Study subjects rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 (0=no pain, 10= the highest level of pain experienced), hence the lower the score the better the outcome. Score reported is reporting a difference/change between two time points. | during/just before sacroiliac (SI) injection and 2 weeks post-procedure |
| Change in Pain Score Since SI Injection at 3 Months Post-procedure Using the DoD/VA PRS | Study subjects rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 (0=no pain, 10= the highest level of pain experienced), hence the lower the score the better the outcome.Score reported is reporting a difference/change between two time points. | during/just before sacroiliac (SI) injection and 3 months post-procedure |
| Satisfaction of Procedure as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability Using a Numerical Scale 1-5 | "1= very dissatisfied" to "5=very satisfied". | 2 weeks post-procedure |
| Satisfaction of Procedure as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability Using a Numerical Scale 1-5 | "1= very dissatisfied" to "5=very satisfied". | 3 months post-procedure |
| Ultrasound Guidance |
In Group B Ultrasound will be used to Guide Needle Placement to inject steroid into joint.
|
| COMPLETED |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Fluoroscopic Guidance | In Group A : Fluoroscopy will be used to Guide Needle Placement to inject Steroid into joint.
|
| BG001 | Ultrasound Guidance | In Group B Ultrasound will be used to Guide Needle Placement to inject steroid into joint.
|
| BG002 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Standard Deviation | years |
| |||||||||||||||
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
|
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Difference in Minutes Between a Sacroiliac Joint Injection Done With Ultrasound vs Fluoroscopy | during procedure from the time monitors are placed on patient to the time of withdrawal of needle from skin | Posted | Mean | Full Range | minutes | difference in minutes between a sacroiliac joint injection, an expected average of 9 minutes |
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Primary | Change in Pain Score From Baseline to 30 Minutes Pre-procedure Using the Defense and Veterans Pain Rating Scale (DoD/VA PRS) 0-10 | Study subjects rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 (0=no pain, 10= the highest level of pain experienced), hence the lower the score the better the outcome. | Posted | Mean | Full Range | units on a scale | 30 minutes pre-procedure minus baseline |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Primary | Change in Pain Score From Baseline to 2 Weeks Post-procedure Using the DoD/VA PRS | Study subjects rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 (0=no pain, 10= the highest level of pain experienced), hence the lower the score the better the outcome. | Posted | Mean | Full Range | units on a scale | 2 weeks post-procedure minus baseline |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Primary | Change in Pain Score From Baseline to 3 Months Post-procedure Using the DoD/VA PRS | Study subjects rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 (0=no pain, 10= the highest level of pain experienced), hence the lower the score the better the outcome. | numbers of participants analyzed are not consistent because study subjects were lost to follow-up along different points in time in the study | Posted | Mean | Full Range | units on a scale | 3 months post-procedure minus baseline |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Impression of Change of Condition at 2 Weeks Post-procedure Using the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scale | Study subjects rate their change in overall condition on a scale of 0-6 (0=no change, 6=better and a definite improvement that has made a real worthwhile difference). The range of the change in pain for both groups observed was in fact 0-5. | Numbers of participants analyzed are not consistent because study subjects were lost to follow-up along different points in time in the study. | Posted | Mean | Full Range | units on a scale | 2 weeks post-procedure |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Impression of Change of Condition at 3 Months Post-procedure Using the PGIC Scale | Study subjects rate their change in overall condition on a scale of 0-6 (0=no change, 6=better and a definite improvement that has made a real worthwhile difference). The range of the change in pain for both groups observed was in fact 0-5. | Numbers of participants analyzed are not consistent because study subjects were lost to follow-up along different points in time in the study. | Posted | Mean | Full Range | units on a scale | 3 months post-procedure |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change in Pain Score Since Sacroiliac (SI) Injection at 2 Weeks Post-procedure Using the DoD/VA PRS | Study subjects rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 (0=no pain, 10= the highest level of pain experienced), hence the lower the score the better the outcome. Score reported is reporting a difference/change between two time points. | Numbers of participants analyzed are not consistent because study subjects were lost to follow-up along different points in time in the study. | Posted | Mean | Full Range | units on a scale | during/just before sacroiliac (SI) injection and 2 weeks post-procedure |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change in Pain Score Since SI Injection at 3 Months Post-procedure Using the DoD/VA PRS | Study subjects rate their pain on a scale of 0-10 (0=no pain, 10= the highest level of pain experienced), hence the lower the score the better the outcome.Score reported is reporting a difference/change between two time points. | Numbers of participants analyzed are not consistent because study subjects were lost to follow-up along different points in time in the study. | Posted | Mean | Full Range | units on a scale | during/just before sacroiliac (SI) injection and 3 months post-procedure |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Satisfaction of Procedure as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability Using a Numerical Scale 1-5 | "1= very dissatisfied" to "5=very satisfied". | Numbers of participants analyzed are not consistent because study subjects were lost to follow-up along different points in time in the study. | Posted | Mean | Full Range | units on a scale of satisfaction | 2 weeks post-procedure |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Satisfaction of Procedure as a Measure of Safety and Tolerability Using a Numerical Scale 1-5 | "1= very dissatisfied" to "5=very satisfied". | Numbers of participants analyzed are not consistent because study subjects were lost to follow-up along different points in time in the study. | Posted | Mean | Full Range | units on a scale of satisfaction | 3 months post-procedure |
|
Not provided
All adverse events, including serious adverse events, were collected but none occurred. Data input includes all non-serious adverse events that occurred during this study.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Fluoroscopic Guidance | In Group A : Fluoroscopy will be used to Guide Needle Placement to inject Steroid into joint.
| 0 | 14 | 5 | 14 | ||
| EG001 | Ultrasound Guidance | In Group B Ultrasound will be used to Guide Needle Placement to inject steroid into joint.
| 0 | 14 | 3 | 14 |
Not provided
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vasovagal reaction | Cardiac disorders | Non-systematic Assessment |
| ||
| Facetogenic back pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | Non-systematic Assessment |
| ||
| Lower back pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | Non-systematic Assessment |
| ||
| Myofascial pain syndrome | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | Non-systematic Assessment |
| ||
| Sacroiliac joint pain | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LCDR Ian M Fowler, MD | Naval Medical Center San Diego | 619-532-8954 | ian.m.fowler.mil@mail.mil |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D058566 | Sacroiliitis |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D001168 | Arthritis |
| D007592 | Joint Diseases |
| D009140 | Musculoskeletal Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D014221 | Triamcinolone |
| D008012 | Lidocaine |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D011245 | Pregnadienes |
| D011278 | Pregnanes |
| D013256 | Steroids |
| D000072473 | Fused-Ring Compounds |
| D011083 | Polycyclic Compounds |
| D013259 | Steroids, Fluorinated |
| D000083 | Acetanilides |
| D000813 | Anilides |
| D000577 | Amides |
| D009930 | Organic Chemicals |
| D000814 | Aniline Compounds |
| D000588 | Amines |
Not provided
Not provided
| Male |
|
| Participants |
|
|
|
|
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
|
|
|
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Units |
|---|
| Counts |
|---|
| Participants |
|
|
| Units |
|---|
| Counts |
|---|
| Participants |
|
|