Effectiveness of Ozone Therapy Versus Pulsed Radiofrequency in Low Back Pain With Radiculopathy

Comparative Effectiveness of Ozone Therapy Versus Pulsed Radiofrequency in Low Back Pain With Radiculopathy: a Retrospective Comparative Study

Treatment selection for refractory radicular low back pain is frequently made in the absence of direct comparative evidence between competing minimally invasive options. By placing ozone therapy and PRF side by side within a single clinical service and following patients for six months, this study contributes pragmatic evidence that maps more closely onto everyday decision-making than isolated single-arm reports.

The findings carry practical implications for clinicians, patients, and health systems. For clinicians, a clearer understanding of which modality offers more sustained pain relief can inform first-line selection and patient counseling. For patients, improved durability of benefit translates directly into better quality of life, reduced reliance on systemic analgesics, and a lower likelihood of progressing to surgery. For resource-constrained health systems, evidence favoring a lower-cost, well-tolerated, outpatient procedure has clear value for service planning and cost-effectiveness.

Finally, by reporting outcomes transparently-including instances where between-group differences did not survive statistical adjustment-this study aims to add measured, reliable evidence to a literature that has at times been limited by small samples, heterogeneous protocols, and short follow-up.

Inclusion Criteria:

• • Age greater than 18 years.

  • Low back and leg pain of more than six weeks' duration.
  • Failure to respond to conservative management.
  • Grade I-IV disc pathology.
  • Unilateral leg pain.
  • Three or fewer spinal levels are involved.

Exclusion Criteria:

• • Severe canal or foraminal stenosis.

  • Severely dehydrated disc.
  • Allergy to antibiotics or contrast media.
  • Previous spine surgery.