Determination of the Prevalence From Clinical Diagnosis of Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction in Patients With Lumbar Disc Hernia and an Evaluation of the Effect of This Combination on Pain and Quality of Life

Abstract

Study Design. A prospective cross-sectional study. Objective. To evaluate the prevalence of sacroiliac joint dysfunction in patients with lumbar disc hernia and examine the variations in clinical parameters cause by this combination. Summary of Background Data. Although one of the many agents leading to lumbar pain is sacroiliac dysfunction, little progress has still been made to evaluate mechanical pain from sacroiliac joint dysfunction within the context of differential diagnosis of lumbar pain. Methods. Two hundred thirty-four patients already diagnosed with lumbar disc hernia were included in the study. During the evaluation, sacroiliac joint dysfunction was investigated using specific tests, pain levels with a Visual Analog Scale, and the presence of neuropathic pain using Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs Pain Scale. Other clinical assessments were performed using the Beck Depression Inventory, Health Assessment Questionnaire, and Tampa Kinesiophobia Scale. Results. 63.2% of patients were female and 36.8% were male. Mean age was 46.72 ± 11.14 years. The level of sacroiliac joint dysfunction was 33.3% in the research population. In terms of sex distribution, the proportion of women was higher in the group with sacroiliac joint dysfunction (P < 0.05). No significant difference was observed in pain intensity assessed using a Visual Pain Scale between the groups (P > 0.05), but the level of neuropathic pain was significantly higher in the group with dysfunction (P < 0.05). In the group with sacroiliac joint dysfunction, the presence of depression was significantly higher (P = 0.009), functional capacity was worse (P < 0.001), and the presence of kinesophobia was higher (P = 0.02). Conclusion. Our study results will be useful in attracting the attention of clinicians away from the intervertebral disc to the sacroiliac joint in order to avoid unnecessary and aggressive treatments. Level of Evidence: 2

Analysis of lumbar lateral instability on upright left and right bending radiographs in symptomatic patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis

“…Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were evaluated using visual analog scale (VAS) for back pain, VAS for leg pain, and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scale [ 12 , 13 ]. In addition, pain features were evaluated through questionnaires completed by the patients, which consisted of the following items: pain on rising from a chair, pain on prolonged standing, pain on walking some distance, pain on getting out of a car and pain on climbing stairs.…”

Unexpected Sex Differences in the Relationship of Sacroiliac Joint and Lumbar Spine Degeneration

“…Postoperative SIJ pain is one of the most common complaints after spondylodesis [ 18 ]. The possibility of concomitant SIJ related pain with degenerative conditions of the lumbar spine should therefore be clinically explored preoperatively [ 19 ], as operative fusion of the SIJ [ 20 ] could be achieved by spino-pelvic anchoring in the same procedure [ 21 ]. In females, no association of SIJ degeneration and anatomical parameters or degeneration of the lumbar spine could be shown.…”

Change in Pelvic Incidence Associated With Sacroiliac Joint Dysfunction: A Case Report

“…Diagnosis of SIJ dysfunction is often a challenge due to the complex anatomy and biomechanics of the joint [ 16 ]. Clinicians typically rely on composites of pain provocation results [ 17 ]. These maneuvers include distraction, thigh thrust, compression, sacral thrust, Gaenslen and FABER (flexion-abduction-external rotation) tests [ 16 , 17 ].…”

“…Clinicians typically rely on composites of pain provocation results [ 17 ]. These maneuvers include distraction, thigh thrust, compression, sacral thrust, Gaenslen and FABER (flexion-abduction-external rotation) tests [ 16 , 17 ]. Positivity in three out of six provocation tests was adopted as the criterion [ 17 ].…”