Non-inferiority study assessing the utility of postcervical and lumbar radiofrequency ablation steroid use
Main finding · Pain intensity (NRS)Result — go to the resultMean difference −0.23 95% CI −0.76 to 0.30Authors' conclusion
This study suggests that the addition of steroids to the RFA procedure does not provide added benefits and is therefore not worth the additional risks that they pose.
Study context
- Population
- Adults (≥18 years) scheduled for cervical or lumbar radiofrequency ablation (RFA)
- Participants
- 365 completed baseline assessments
- Exposure
- RFA alone vs RFA with steroids
- Steroidn = 175reference
- Non-steroidn = 190
- Outcome
- Average pain score on NRS
- Follow-up
- 7 days
Methodological detailssingle-centre, non-inferiority
- Single-centre
- Non-inferiority
Main finding
Pain intensity (NRS)
Mean difference
−0.23
95% CI −0.76 to 0.30
Steroid vs Non-steroid
mean difference −0.23 (95% CI −0.76 to 0.30)
Non-inferiority margin 1.5 as printed, not drawn
As reported in the abstract
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Secondary outcomes
Anxiety, depression and physical function (PROMIS short forms) · 7 and 60 days
- No significant differences between groups at either 7 or 60 days
Parts of this Brief are withheld: the automatic checks could not confirm them against the abstract.
Original publication
Non-inferiority study assessing the utility of postcervical and lumbar radiofrequency ablation steroid use. Reg Anesth Pain Med. Published 3 August 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →