Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane (ESP) block and compare with the conventional physical therapy in chronic low back pain (LBP).
METHODS: This prospective case-controlled study included patients with chronic LBP. Their clinical and demographic data were obtained, and they were divided into two groups for conventional physical therapy and ESP blocks. Prior to treatment, on the first day, the second week, and the third month, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score were evaluated.
RESULTS: The study included 43 patients, 21 in the ESP block group and 22 in the conventional physical therapy group. The VAS in movement was higher in the ESP block group at baseline (p = 0.047). On the first day after the treatments, the ESP block group showed lower resting (p < 0.001) and movement (p = 0.001) VAS values than the conventional physical therapy group. At the end of 3 months, both groups had improved VAS and ODI scores (all p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: US-guided ESP block might be considered a successful, safe, and technically simple alternative treatment in patients with chronic LBP to control pain and reduce the cost of physical therapy and lost workdays.
METHODS: This prospective case-controlled study included patients with chronic LBP. Their clinical and demographic data were obtained, and they were divided into two groups for conventional physical therapy and ESP blocks. Prior to treatment, on the first day, the second week, and the third month, the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score were evaluated.
RESULTS: The study included 43 patients, 21 in the ESP block group and 22 in the conventional physical therapy group. The VAS in movement was higher in the ESP block group at baseline (p = 0.047). On the first day after the treatments, the ESP block group showed lower resting (p < 0.001) and movement (p = 0.001) VAS values than the conventional physical therapy group. At the end of 3 months, both groups had improved VAS and ODI scores (all p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: US-guided ESP block might be considered a successful, safe, and technically simple alternative treatment in patients with chronic LBP to control pain and reduce the cost of physical therapy and lost workdays.
摘要：
目的：目的是评估超声引导下竖脊肌平面（ESP）阻滞的疗效，并与常规物理治疗慢性下腰痛（LBP）进行比较。
方法：这项前瞻性病例对照研究包括慢性LBP患者。获得了他们的临床和人口统计数据，并将其分为两组进行常规物理治疗和ESP阻滞。治疗前,第一天,第二周,第三个月,评估Oswestry残疾指数（ODI）和视觉模拟量表（VAS）疼痛评分。
结果：该研究包括43名患者，ESP阻滞组21例,常规物理治疗组22例。在基线时，ESP阻滞组的运动VAS较高（p=0.047）。治疗后的第一天，ESP阻滞组的静息(p<0.001)和运动(p=0.001)VAS值低于常规物理治疗组.在三个月结束时，两组的VAS和ODI评分均有改善(均p<0.001).
结论：美国指导的ESP阻断可能被认为是成功的，安全,和技术上简单的替代治疗慢性LBP患者，以控制疼痛，减少物理治疗和减少工作日的费用。
方法：这项前瞻性病例对照研究包括慢性LBP患者。获得了他们的临床和人口统计数据，并将其分为两组进行常规物理治疗和ESP阻滞。治疗前,第一天,第二周,第三个月,评估Oswestry残疾指数（ODI）和视觉模拟量表（VAS）疼痛评分。
结果：该研究包括43名患者，ESP阻滞组21例,常规物理治疗组22例。在基线时，ESP阻滞组的运动VAS较高（p=0.047）。治疗后的第一天，ESP阻滞组的静息(p<0.001)和运动(p=0.001)VAS值低于常规物理治疗组.在三个月结束时，两组的VAS和ODI评分均有改善(均p<0.001).
结论：美国指导的ESP阻断可能被认为是成功的，安全,和技术上简单的替代治疗慢性LBP患者，以控制疼痛，减少物理治疗和减少工作日的费用。
