Comparing the Effects of Ultrasound Versus Fluoroscopy for Sacroiliac Joint Injections
Comparison of the Efficacy of Two Techniques for Sacroiliac Joint Injection: Ultrasound Guidance Versus Fluoroscopic Guidance
1 other identifier
interventional
28
1 country
1
Brief Summary
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.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at below P25 for not_applicable
Started Oct 2012
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
October 1, 2012
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
March 1, 2014
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
March 1, 2014
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
September 30, 2014
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
April 17, 2015
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
November 13, 2015
CompletedNovember 13, 2015
October 1, 2015
1.4 years
September 30, 2014
June 26, 2015
October 7, 2015
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (4)
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
Secondary Outcomes (6)
Impression of Change of Condition at 2 Weeks Post-procedure Using the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) Scale
2 weeks post-procedure
Impression of Change of Condition at 3 Months Post-procedure Using the PGIC Scale
3 months post-procedure
Change in Pain Score Since Sacroiliac (SI) Injection at 2 Weeks Post-procedure Using the DoD/VA PRS
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
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
2 weeks post-procedure
- +1 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
Fluoroscopic Guidance
ACTIVE COMPARATORPatients 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
EXPERIMENTALPatients 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.
Interventions
* Needle entry point is in the lower one-third of the SIJ * Sterile preparation (with chlorhexidine) and draping and 3 mL of 1% lidocaine injected subcutaneously at site of needle entry * Under fluoroscopy guidance, Havel's Inc. EchoStim (facet tip) 21 Gauge 4" needle is inserted in a coaxial fashion into the SIJ * 1 mL of contrast (iohexol 300 mg/mL) is injected to outline the SIJ and to ensure no vascular uptake * Injection of 20 mg of triamcinolone diluted in 4 mL of 1% lidocaine * Patient observed in recovery bay for 20 minutes and then discharged home
* Sterile preparation (with chlorhexidine) and drape * Using ultrasound guidance (SonoSite S-nerve) with a low frequency (2-5 Hz) curvilinear transducer in a sterile cover, the transducer is placed in a transverse plane over the SIJ and needle entry point is chosen at the medial end of the ultrasound transducer * 3 mL of 1% lidocaine is injected subcutaneously at site of needle entry * Under ultrasound guidance, a Havel's Inc. EchoStim (facet tip) 21 Gauge 4" needle is inserted in a medial to lateral direction and guided into the SIJ. (0.5-2 mL of normal saline may be injected during needle insertion to locate tip of needle and to ensure solution does not "spill out" onto sacrum). * After using the Doppler function to identify any surrounding vessels (to avoid intravascular injection), 20 mg of triamcinolone diluted in 4 mL of 1% lidocaine is injected. * Patient observed in recovery bay for 20 minutes and then discharged home
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Diagnosis of SIJ dysfunction by history and physical exam
- History: Either low back pain or buttock pain
- Exam: Either tenderness to palpation over the SIJ or a positive provocative maneuver (i.e., Patrick's, Gaenslen's, and/or Yeoman's test)
- Failed a trial of conservative therapy which may included medications, physical therapy, or both
- Age \> 18
- Patient agrees to participate in study
You may not qualify if:
- Coagulopathy
- Renal or Hepatic Failure
- Current Pregnancy or actively pursuing pregnancy
- Known allergy to local anesthetic or steroids
- Infection at site of needle placement or SIJ infection
- Patient unable to consent himself or herself
- Patient refusal
- Prior surgical procedures involving the SIJ
- Body Mass Index \> 35 kg/m2
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Pain Medicine Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Naval Medical Center, San Diego
San Diego, California, 92134, United States
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Interventions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Intervention Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- LCDR Ian M Fowler, MD
- Organization
- Naval Medical Center San Diego
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Steven R Hanling, MD
United States Naval Medical Center, San Diego
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- Yes
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- FED
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
September 30, 2014
First Posted
April 17, 2015
Study Start
October 1, 2012
Primary Completion
March 1, 2014
Study Completion
March 1, 2014
Last Updated
November 13, 2015
Results First Posted
November 13, 2015
Record last verified: 2015-10