LESS Study Overview
Brief Summary
The broad, long-term objective of this research protocol is to improve the quality of life for patients suffering from lumbar spinal stenosis. This objective will be met by examining the safety and clinical efficacy of epidural steroid injections for treatment of pain associated with lumbar spinal stenosis. This prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled trial (RCT) will test the hypothesis that the effectiveness of epidural steroid injections (ESI) plus local anesthetic (LA) is greater than epidural injections of LA alone in older adults with lumbar spinal stenosis.
Detailed Description
Lumbar spinal stenosis is one of the most common causes of low back pain in the elderly and can lead to significant disability. The symptoms of spinal stenosis range from low back pain to neurogenic claudication with lower extremity pain, weakness and/or sensory changes related to activities. As spinal stenosis can affect the central canal as well as the lateral recesses and intervertebral foramen variably, symptoms can involve single or multiple myotomes and dermatomes. Since the causes of spinal stenosis are most frequently degenerative changes, the symptoms of spinal stenosis often, but not always, worsen over time. Despite the prevalence of spinal stenosis, treatment of spinal stenosis remains somewhat controversial. Common treatments include conservative measures such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDS), activity modification and physical therapy as well as more invasive treatments such as epidural steroid injections and surgery. Although surgery has been demonstrated to provide some benefit to many individuals with spinal stenosis, ESI are being used with increasing frequency as a less invasive, potentially more cost effective and safer treatment for spinal stenosis. However, there is a lack of data to demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of epidural steroid injections for spinal stenosis, particularly in the older adults.
Because of the compelling need for effective therapy for patients suffering from spinal stenosis and because epidural steroid injections are rapidly becoming standard of care for treating these patients - even in the absence of compelling clinical evidence - we are conducting a randomized, controlled trial in order to test the hypothesis that lumbar epidural steroid injections improve functional status and pain associated with spinal stenosis. The main objective of the study is to conduct a blinded, randomized controlled trial (RCT) in elderly patients with spinal stenosis to test if the effectiveness of epidural steroid injections (ESI) plus local anesthetic (LA) is greater than LA alone.
ClinicalTrials.gov
Publications
- Friedly JL, Bresnahan BW, Comstock B, Turner JA, Deyo RA, Sullivan SD, Heagerty P, Bauer Z, Nedeljkovic SS, Avins AL, Nerenz D, Jarvik JG. Study protocol- Lumbar Epidural steroid injections for Spinal Stenosis (LESS): a double-blind randomized controlled trial of epidural steroid injections for lumbar spinal stenosis among older adults. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2012 Mar 29;13:48. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-13-48.
- Turner JA, Comstock BA, Standaert CJ, Heagerty PJ, Jarvik JG, Deyo RA, Wasan AD, Nedeljkovic SS, Friedly JL. Can patient characteristics predict benefit from epidural corticosteroid injections for lumbar spinal stenosis symptoms? Spine J. 2015 Nov 1;15(11):2319-31. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.06.050. Epub 2015 Jun 19.
- Suri P, Pashova H, Heagerty PJ, Jarvik JG, Turner JA, Comstock BA, Bauer Z, Annaswamy TM, Nedeljkovic SS, Wasan AD, Friedly JL. Short-term improvements in disability mediate patient satisfaction after epidural corticosteroid injections for symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015 Sep 1;40(17):1363-70. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001000.
- Friedly JL, Comstock BA, Turner JA, Heagerty PJ, Deyo RA, Sullivan SD, Bauer Z, Bresnahan BW, Avins AL, Nedeljkovic SS, Nerenz DR, Standaert C, Kessler L, Akuthota V, Annaswamy T, Chen A, Diehn F, Firtch W, Gerges FJ, Gilligan C, Goldberg H, Kennedy DJ, Mandel S, Tyburski M, Sanders W, Sibell D, Smuck M, Wasan A, Won L, Jarvik JG. A randomized trial of epidural glucocorticoid injections for spinal stenosis. N Engl J Med. 2014 Jul 3;371(1):11-21. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1313265.
- Friedly JL, Comstock BA, Turner JA, Heagerty PJ, Deyo RA, Bauer Z, Avins AL, Nedeljkovic SS, Nerenz DR, Shi XR, Annaswamy T, Standaert CJ, Smuck M, Kennedy DJ, Akuthota V, Sibell D, Wasan AD, Diehn F, Suri P, Rundell SD, Kessler L, Chen AS, Jarvik JG. Long-Term Effects of Repeated Injections of Local Anesthetic With or Without Corticosteroid for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Randomized Trial. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017 Aug;98(8):1499-1507.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2017.02.029. Epub 2017 Apr 8.
LESSER Study Overview
Brief Summary
Spinal stenosis is one of the most common causes of low back pain among older adults and can result in significant disability. Despite this, it still isn't known which treatments are most effective or what outcomes are most important to these older adults. Through a Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) contract, the investigators are building on the existing infrastructure of an AHRQ-funded (ARRA CHOICE award) comparative effectiveness research (CER) trial of epidural steroid injections (ESI) for spinal stenosis (the LESS trial) to address several critical research questions. The proposed study will answer the following key questions. Do decision aids tailored to older adults with spinal stenosis change patient decision-making regarding subsequent treatments? Do patients respond differently at subsequent outcome assessments time-points after receiving tailored decision aids that contain their own individual outcome data from prior treatments? The investigators hypothesize that providing these individualized reports will allow patients to make more informed choices regarding subsequent treatments, leading to reduced use of ineffective treatments and improved outcomes overall.
Detailed Description
LESS trial participants will be randomized to receive the individualized outcome report before the 18-month interview or after the 24-month follow up. Both groups will be asked to rank outcome domains of most importance to them, to answer questions regarding their beliefs about receiving future treatments for spinal stenosis and to complete the standard self-reported outcomes questionnaire. In addition, we will ask the study participants whether the information presented in the individualized report was helpful in deciding their future epidural injection treatments as well as if the content of the reports was easy to understand. At 24 months, we will repeat the interview and the outcomes assessment. We will again compare the groups in terms of their responses to determine if there are lasting differences in how patients who received the individualized reports make decisions regarding future treatments and respond to the self-reported outcomes questions. In addition, we will compare healthcare utilization between the two groups from 18 months to 24 months to determine if providing the individualized outcomes reports changed treatment utilization (i.e., do people who receive the report undergo fewer subsequent injections or other treatments for pain?). We hypothesize that providing these individualized reports will allow patients to make more informed choices regarding subsequent treatments, leading to reduced use of ineffective treatments and improved outcomes overall.