Venu Akuthota

Core stability is essential for proper load balance within the spine, pelvis, and kinetic chain. The so-called core is the group of trunk muscles that surround the spine and abdominal viscera. Abdominal, gluteal, hip girdle, paraspinal, and other muscles work in concert to provide spinal stability. Core stability and its motor control have been shown to be imperative for initiation of functional limb movements, as needed in athletics. Sports medicine practitioners use core strengthening techniques to improve performance and prevent injury. Core strengthening, often called lumbar stabilization, also has been used as a therapeutic exercise treatment regimen for low back pain conditions. This article summarizes the anatomy of the core, the progression of core strengthening, the available evidence for its theoretical construct, and its efficacy in musculoskeletal conditions.

BACKGROUND: Epidural glucocorticoid injections are widely used to treat symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis, a common cause of pain and disability in older adults. However, rigorous data are lacking regarding the effectiveness and safety of these injections. METHODS: In a double-blind, multisite trial, we randomly assigned 400 patients who had lumbar central spinal stenosis and moderate-to-severe leg pain and disability to receive epidural injections of glucocorticoids plus lidocaine or lidocaine alone. The patients received one or two injections before the primary outcome evaluation, performed 6 weeks after randomization and the first injection. The primary outcomes were the score on the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ, in which scores range from 0 to 24, with higher scores indicating greater physical disability) and the rating of the intensity of leg pain (on a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 indicating no pain and 10 indicating "pain as bad as you can imagine"). RESULTS: At 6 weeks, there were no significant between-group differences in the RMDQ score (adjusted difference in the average treatment effect between the glucocorticoid-lidocaine group and the lidocaine-alone group, -1.0 points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.1 to 0.1; P=0.07) or the intensity of leg pain (adjusted difference in the average treatment effect, -0.2 points; 95% CI, -0.8 to 0.4; P=0.48). A prespecified secondary subgroup analysis with stratification according to type of injection (interlaminar vs. transforaminal) likewise showed no significant differences at 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis, epidural injection of glucocorticoids plus lidocaine offered minimal or no short-term benefit as compared with epidural injection of lidocaine alone. (Funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01238536.).

OBJECTIVE: To determine which hip provocation maneuvers best predict the presence of an intra-articular hip pathology. DESIGN: Prospective diagnostic study. SETTING: Musculoskeletal clinic at a university-based multispecialty group practice. PARTICIPANTS: Fifty subjects referred for intra-articular hip injection under fluoroscopic guidance. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects were examined with 4 pain provocation maneuvers before and after anesthetic intra-articular hip injection administered under fluoroscopic guidance. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Presence of intra-articular hip pain generator was confirmed by > or =80% improvement on visual analog scale after intra-articular hip injection. RESULTS: The most sensitive tests were flexion abduction external rotation (FABER) test and internal rotation over pressure (IROP) maneuver. For the FABER test, sensitivity was 0.82 (95% CI 0.57-0.96); sensitivity for the IROP maneuver was 0.91 (95% CI 0.68-0.99). The most specific test was the Stinchfield maneuver, with specificity at 0.32 (95% CI 0.14-0.55). FABER and IROP had the highest positive predictive value, with 0.46 (95% CI 0.28-0.65) and 0.47 (95% CI 0.29-0.64), respectively. IROP had the highest negative predictive value at 0.71 (95% CI 0.25-0.98). CONCLUSIONS: IROP and FABER may be worthwhile components of the clinical evaluation of hip pain to determine intra-articular hip pathology. These tests are nonspecific and therefore not necessarily negative in the absence of intra-articular hip pathology. These hip provocation maneuvers are a useful part of an evaluation that includes history, further examination findings, and other diagnostic studies.