Corticosteroid Injections: A Review of Sex-Related Side Effects

Brook, Emily M.; Hu, Caroline H.; Kingston, Kiera A; Matzkin, Elizabeth G.

doi:10.3928/01477447-20161116-07

Cited by 12 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…18 An investigation performed in 1999 estimated that infection occurs in 4.6 of every 100 000 intra-articular corticosteroid injections, a 0.0046% incidence rate. 3,18 Interestingly, in our cohort, no patient developed a postinjection infection, but this may be due to a lack of sufficient power. It is also notable that no anaphylactic reactions were seen either, even though this has been reported in the literature as a potential side effect and has been observed shortly after injection in one patient who required resuscitation years ago by the senior author.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…Previous studies investigating outcomes after corticosteroid injections have used a more heterogeneous anatomic location among their study population, which may have biased study results. 3,9,19,21,23 An example hereof is a study by Kumar and Newman, included 672 patients receiving intra-articular or extra-articular injections of the knee, elbow, wrist, shoulder, foot, ankle, finger, or hip. 17 Another type of heterogeneity is caused by previous studies that did not distinguish between intra-articular or extra-articular corticosteroid injections.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adverse Events and Their Risk Factors Following Intra-articular Corticosteroid Injections of the Ankle or Subtalar Joint

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Little data exists regarding the incidence of adverse events and their associated risk factors following intra-articular corticosteroid injection of the ankle and subtalar joint. The aim of this study was to determine the complication rate associated with such injections and to identify any predictive risk factors. Methods: Adult patients who had received an intra-articular ankle or subtalar joint injection between January 2000 and April 2016 at one of 3 regional hospitals (2 level 1 trauma centers and 1 community hospital) were included. Patients with prior intra-articular injection of corticosteroid into the ankle or subtalar joint were excluded. Explanatory variables were sex, age, race, body mass index, diabetes status, tobacco use, presence of fluoroscopic guidance, location of intra-articular injection, and administering physician’s years of experience. Results: Of the 1708 patients included in the final cohort, 99 patients (5.8%) had a total of 104 adverse events within 90 days postinjection. The most prevalent types of adverse events were postinjection flare in 78 patients (4.6% of total cohort, 75% of adverse events) followed by skin reaction in 10 patients (0.6% of total cohort, 9% of adverse events). No infections were noted. Multivariable logistic regression analysis found that intra-articular injection in the subtalar ( P = .004) was independently associated with development of an adverse event. Fluoroscopic guidance was not found to be protective of an adverse event compared to nonguided injections ( P = .476). Conclusion: The adverse event rate following intra-articular ankle or subtalar joint corticosteroid injection was 5.8%, with postinjection flare being the most common complication. Infections following injection were not reported. Injection into the subtalar joint was independently associated with the development of an adverse event after intra-articular corticosteroid injection, and this was not mitigated by the use of fluoroscopic guidance. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adverse Events and Their Risk Factors Following Intra-articular Corticosteroid Injections of the Ankle or Subtalar Joint

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They are clinically very effective in reducing joint inflammation, erythema, edema, and acute pain, as well as increasing joint motility. The most commonly used corticosteroids are triamcinolone acetonide, methylprednisolone acetate, betamethasone acetate and disodium phosphate, as well as dexamethasone [11]. Such steroids are used for various conditions, such as asthma [3], atopy, dermatitis [12], rheumatism [2], allergies and cancers [13], as well as pain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A survey of patients’ perspectives of steroid injection (ppyeojusa) in Korea

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Steroid injections are commonly used in pain clinics to relieve pain and treat inflammation. In Korea, these steroid injections are well known as ‘ppyeojusa’, which means to inject into the bone in Korean. Some patients often have a negative perception of this treatment method due to inaccurate information about the treatment and side effects of steroids. The purpose of this study is to investigate patients’ perception and knowledge of ppyeojusa. Methods A questionnaire about ppyeojusa was completed by patients who visited one of the pain clinics in nine university hospitals, from August 1 to September 10, 2017. Results Three-hundred seventy-four patients completed the survey. Eighty-five percent of patients had had ppyeojusa, and 74% of the respondents had heard of ppyeojusa from the mass media, friends or relatives. Only 39% of the patients answered that this injection was safe without side effects if properly spaced. Of the patients surveyed, 21% responded that ppyeojusa are “injections into the bone”; while 15% responded that ppyeojusa are “terrible injections that melted ‘the bone if used a lot’”. Half of the patients did not know what the active constituent is in ppyeojusa. If steroid injections are advised by the pain specialists, 89% of the patients would consent. Conclusions Most pain clinic patients have heard of ppyeojusa. Most patients obtained information about ppyeojusa from mass media, rather than their physicians. Therefore, it is likely that most patients have inaccurate knowledge.

show abstract

“…It’s effective in reducing edema and pain in the short term but not persistent (Huisstede et al, 2010). In addition, specific females related side effects have been reported (Brook et al, 2017). The taping, which serves as a support for the wrist, pulls around the wrist to reduce excessive pressure on the carpal tunnel and induce proper relaxation (Lund and Amadiol, 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%