Literature DB >> 18923325

Sciatica: review of epidemiological studies and prevalence estimates.

Kika Konstantinou1, Kate M Dunn.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Review of studies on sciatica prevalence and synthesis of available evidence.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the studies on sciatica prevalence, discuss reasons for variation in estimates, provide suggestions for improving accuracy of recording sciatica in epidemiological and outcome studies so as to enable better evaluation of natural history and treatment effect in the presence of low back pain related sciatica. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Sciatica is a common cause of pain and disability. It is more persistent and severe than low back pain, has a less favorable outcome and consumes more health resources. However, sciatica prevalence rates reported in different studies and reviews vary considerably and provide no clear picture about sciatica prevalence.
METHODS: A literature search of all English language peer reviewed publications was conducted using Medline, EMBASE, and CINAHL for the years 1980-2006. Two reviewers extracted data on sciatica prevalence and definitions from the identified articles.
RESULTS: Of the papers retrieved, 23 were included in the review. Only 2 studies out of the 23 used clinical assessment for assessing sciatic symptoms, and definitions of sciatica varied widely. Sciatica prevalence from different studies ranged from 1.2% to 43%.
CONCLUSION: Sciatica prevalence estimates vary considerably between studies. This may be due to differences in definitions, methods of data collection and perhaps populations studied. Suggestions are made on how to improve accuracy of capturing sciatica in epidemiological studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18923325     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318183a4a2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  137 in total

1.  Complementary and alternative medicine use among US adults with common neurological conditions.

Authors:  Rebecca Erwin Wells; Russell S Phillips; Steven C Schachter; Ellen P McCarthy
Journal:  J Neurol       Date:  2010-06-11       Impact factor: 4.849

2.  [Optimized assessment of the outcome in patients with radicular back pain of the lumbar spine. The modified NASS questionnaire].

Authors:  M Janousek; S Ferrari; U D Schmid; H A Bischoff; M Balsiger; R Theiler
Journal:  Schmerz       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.107

3.  A cohort study comparing the serum levels of pro- or anti-inflammatory cytokines in patients with lumbar radicular pain and healthy subjects.

Authors:  Kun Wang; Jun-Ping Bao; Shu Yang; Xin Hong; Lei Liu; Xin-Hui Xie; Xiao-Tao Wu
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Aging of mouse intervertebral disc and association with back pain.

Authors:  Kathleen Vincent; Sarthak Mohanty; Robert Pinelli; Raffaella Bonavita; Paul Pricop; Todd J Albert; Chitra Lekha Dahia
Journal:  Bone       Date:  2019-03-29       Impact factor: 4.398

5.  Minimally invasive versus open surgery for cervical and lumbar discectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Nathan Evaniew; Moin Khan; Brian Drew; Desmond Kwok; Mohit Bhandari; Michelle Ghert
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2014-10-01

Review 6.  Current concepts for lumbar disc herniation.

Authors:  Thami Benzakour; Vasilios Igoumenou; Andreas F Mavrogenis; Ahmed Benzakour
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 7.  The Challenges of Treating Sciatica Pain in Older Adults.

Authors:  Manuela L Ferreira; Andrew McLachlan
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 3.923

8.  Selective nerve root blocks vs. caudal epidural injection for single level prolapsed lumbar intervertebral disc - A prospective randomized study.

Authors:  Sudhir Singh; Sanjiv Kumar; Gaurav Chahal; Reetu Verma
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2016-02-22

9.  A randomized clinical trial of the effectiveness of mechanical traction for sub-groups of patients with low back pain: study methods and rationale.

Authors:  Julie M Fritz; Anne Thackeray; John D Childs; Gerard P Brennan
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2010-04-30       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Is NICE guidance for identifying lumbar nerve root compression misguided?

Authors:  Tim Germon; William Singleton; Jeremy Hobart
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-02-19       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.