OBJECTIVE: To establish the prevalence and agreement between reported and observed leg weakness in people with sciatica. To establish which factors mediate any identified difference between reported and observed leg weakness in people with sciatica.
METHODS: 68 people with a clinical diagnosis of sciatica, records from spinal service, secondary care NHS Hospital, England, UK reviewed. Primary outcome measures were the sciatica bothersome index for reported leg weakness and the Medical Research Council scale for observed weakness. Agreement was established with Cohen\'s Kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient. Potential factors that may mediate a difference between reported and observed weakness included leg pain, sciatica bothersome index sensory subscale, age, hospital anxiety and depression subscale for anxiety.
RESULTS: 85% of patients reported weakness but only 34% had observed weakness. Cohen\'s Kappa (0.066, 95% CI - 0.53, 0.186; p = 0.317)] and ICC 0.213 (95% CI - 0.26, 0.428, p = 0.040) both showed poor agreement between reported and observed weakness. The difference between reported and observed measures of weakness was mediated by the severity of leg pain (b = 0.281, p = 0.024) and age (b = 0.253, p = 0.042).
CONCLUSIONS: There is a high prevalence of reported leg weakness in people with sciatica, which is not reflected in observed clinical measures of weakness. Differences between reported and observed weakness may be driven by the severity of leg pain and age. Further work needs to establish whether other objective measures can detect patient reported weakness.

BACKGROUND: Surgery can help patients with leg pain caused by sciatica recover faster, but by 12 months outcomes are similar to nonsurgical management. For many the decision to have surgery may require reflection, and patient decision aids are an evidence-based clinical tool that can help guide patients through this decision.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop and refine a decision aid for patients with sciatica who are deciding whether to have surgery or \'wait and see\' (i.e., try nonsurgical management first).
METHODS: Semistructured interviews with think-aloud user-testing protocol.
METHODS: Twenty clinicians and 20 patients with lived experience of low back pain or sciatica.
METHODS: Items from Technology Acceptance Model, Preparation for Decision Making Scale and Decision Quality Instrument for Herniated Disc 2.0 (knowledge instrument).
METHODS: The prototype integrated relevant research with working group perspectives, decision aid standards and health literacy guidelines. The research team refined the prototype through seven rounds of user-testing, which involved discussing user-testing feedback and implementing changes before progressing to the next round.
RESULTS: As a result of working group feedback, the decision aid was divided into sections: before, during and after a visit to the surgeon. Across all rounds of user-testing, clinicians rated the resource 5.9/7 (SD = 1.0) for perceived usefulness, and 6.0/7 for perceived ease of use (SD = 0.8). Patients reported the decision aid was easy to understand, on average correctly answering 3.4/5 knowledge questions (SD = 1.2) about surgery for sciatica. The grade reading score for the website was 9.0. Patients scored highly on preparation for decision-making (4.4/5, SD = 0.7), suggesting strong potential to empower patients. Interview feedback showed that patients and clinicians felt the decision aid would encourage question-asking and help patients reflect on personal values.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians found the decision aid acceptable, patients found it was easy to understand and both groups felt it would empower patients to actively engage in their care and come to an informed decision that aligned with personal values. Input from the working group and user-testing was crucial for ensuring that the decision aid met patient and clinician needs.
UNASSIGNED: Patients and clinicians contributed to prototype development via the working group.

OBJECTIVE: Trial data shows modest reductions in leg pain, disability and surgery avoidance following epidural steroid injections (ESI) for severe sciatica. Despite their common use, there is no clear evidence about which patients are more likely to benefit from ESI. The aim of this study was to generate consensus on potential predictors of outcome following ESI for disc-related sciatica.
METHODS: A list of potential predictors of outcome was generated during a consensus meeting of seven experts. The items were subsequently presented in a two round on-line Delphi study to generate consensus among experts on which items are potential predictors of outcome. Consensus was defined as 70% agreement among participants.
RESULTS: Sixty-one items were generated during the consensus meeting. Of ninety experts invited to participate in the on-line Delphi study, 44 (48%) and 33 (73%) took part in rounds one and two respectively. Twenty-eight additional items suggested by participants in round one were included in round two. Overall, 14 items reached consensus reflecting domains of health, medication use, pain intensity, psychosocial factors, imaging findings and type of injection.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on expert consensus, items that can be routinely collected in clinical practice were identified as potential predictors of outcomes following ESI.

Epidural steroid injection for the treatment of sciatica caused by disc herniation is increasingly used worldwide, but its effectiveness remains controversial. The review aiming to analyze the efficacy of epidural steroid injection on sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the use of epidural steroid injections in the management of sciatica induced by lumbar disc herniation were collected from PubMed and other databases from January, 2008 to December, 2023, with epidural steroid injection in the test group and epidural local anesthetic and/or placebo in the control group. Pain relief rate, assessed by numerical rating scale (NRS) and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, and function recovery, evaluated by Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, were recorded and compared. Meta-analysis was performed by Review Manager. In comparison to the control group, epidural steroid injections have been shown to be effective for providing short- (within 3 months) [MD = 0.44, 95%CI (0.20, 0.68), p = 0.0003] and medium-term (within 6 months) [MD = 0.66, 95%CI (0.09,1.22), p = 0.02] pain relief for sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation, while its long-term pain-relief effect were limited. However, the administration of epidural steroid injections did not lead to a significant improvement on sciatic nerve function in short- [MD = 0.79, 95%CI = (0.39, 1.98), p = 0.19] and long-term [MD = 0.47, 95% CI = (-0.86, 1.80), p = 0.49] assessed by IOD. Furthermore, the analysis revealed that administering epidural steroid injections resulted in a reduction in opioid usage among patients with lumbar disc herniation [MD = -14.45, 95% CI = (-24.61, -4.29), p = 0.005]. The incidence of epidural steroid injection was low. Epidural steroid injection has demonstrated notable efficacy in relieving sciatica caused by lumbar disc herniation in short to medium-term. Therefore, it is recommended as a viable treatment option for individuals suffering from sciatica.

Introduction Sciatica refers to a pain that travels along the course of the sciatic nerve. Patients also often experience paresthesia along with the pain in thighs, which may further radiate to the legs. Most commonly, compression of the lumbosacral nerve root is the cause of this syndrome. Neurodynamics and conventional exercises are considered effective treatment procedures for sciatica. This study aims to find out the efficacy of neurodynamics along with conventional exercises and conventional exercises alone. Methods A total of 58 patients with sciatica aged between 30 and 60 years of both genders were included in the study and randomly divided into a neurodynamic group (n=29) and a conventional group (n=29). Pre-test data were collected before the interventions, and post-test data were collected on the 14th day. The 101 numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) was used to measure data of sciatic pain, the patient-specific functional scale (PSFS) was used to measure the health-related quality of life (HRQL), and a surface electromyography (EMG) biofeedback instrument was used to measure the peak and average muscle activation of the biceps femoris muscle. Results The pre-post data analysis of the neurodynamics and conventional group showed significant (p<0.05) improvement in 101 NPRS, PSFS, and peak EMG values. Insignificant (p>0.05) improvements were seen in average EMG values in the conventional group, and significant (p<0.05) improvement were seen in the neurodynamic group. Between-group analysis showed insignificant (p>0.05) differences in 101 NPRS as well as peak and average EMG values and showed significant (p<0.05) differences in PSFS values. Conclusion Neurodynamics with conventional exercises can help in reducing pain, improving muscle activation of the biceps femoris, and elevating the HRQL of the patient.

Whole-body vibrations have several harmful effects on the population\'s health. The most suitable way to characterize the vibrations is to use the daily vibration exposure A (8) and Vibration Dose Value as specified in Directive 2002/44/EC. Therefore, based on the existing literature, we propose Probit equations that allow us to relate the population percentage affected by the vibration effects (low-back pain, sciatica, and herniated disc) with the A (8) and the Vibration Dose Value. It is worth noting that there is a good correlation between the experimental data and the expressions obtained, especially for low-back pain and herniated discs. Once the expressions have been validated, we analyze the limit values given in the aforementioned legislation, showing that the percentage of the affected population is significant for them. Therefore, this study also proposes new limits based on their own definitions, which are more in line with the results shown in the bibliography.

UNASSIGNED: Sciatica is typically caused by disc herniations or spinal stenosis. Extraspinal compression of the sciatic nerve is less frequent.
UNASSIGNED: We report a rare case of sciatica with compression of the sciatic nerve by a low-flow vascular malformation in a 24-year-old female patient. The special feature of this case was sciatica along the S1 dermatome, which only occurred in the sitting position and inclination because of compression of the sciatic nerve between the vascular malformation and the lesser trochanter. Spinal imaging showed no abnormal findings. Surgery was performed interdisciplinary and included neurosurgery, vascular surgery, and trauma surgery. After surgery, the patient became symptom-free.
UNASSIGNED: Rare and extraspinal causes of local compression of the sciatic nerve should be considered, especially in cases of lacking spinal imaging correlation and untypical clinical presentation. Interdisciplinary surgical cooperation is of special value in cases of rare entities and uncommon locations.

Increasing evidence supported that oxidative stress induced by herniated lumbar disc played important role in the formation of lumbar disc herniation sciatica (LDHS), however, the neural mechanisms underlying LDHS need further clarification. Endomorphin-2 (EM2) is the endogenous ligand for mu-opioid receptor (MOR), and there is increasing evidence implicating the involvement of spinal EM2 in neuropathic pain. In this study, using an nucleus pulposus implantation induced LDHS rat model that displayed obvious mechanical allodynia, it was found that the expression of EM2 in dorsal root ganglion (DRG) and spinal cord was significantly decreased. It was further found that oxidative stress in DRG and spinal cord was significantly increased in LDHS rats, and the reduction of EM2 in DRG and spinal cord was determined by oxidative stress dominated increment of dipeptidylpeptidase IV activity. A systemic treatment with antioxidant could prevent the forming of mechanical allodynia in LDHS rats. In addition, MOR expression in DRG and spinal cord remained unchanged in LDHS rats. Intrathecal injection of MOR antagonist promoted pain behavior in LDHS rats, and the analgesic effect of intrathecal injection of EM2 was stronger than that of endomorphin-1 and morphine. Taken together, our findings suggest that oxidative stress mediated decrement of EM2 in DRG and spinal cord causes the loss of endogenous analgesic effects and enhances the pain sensation of LDHS.

UNASSIGNED: Chronic pain is a significant welfare concern in cats, and neuropathic pain, which arises from aberrant processing of sensory signals within the nervous system, is a subcategory of this type of pain. To comprehend this condition and how multimodal pharmacotherapy plays a central role in alleviating discomfort, it is crucial to delve into the anatomy of nociception and pain perception. In addition, there is an intricate interplay between emotional health and chronic pain in cats, and understanding and addressing the emotional factors that contribute to pain perception, and vice versa, is essential for comprehensive care.Clinical approach:Neuropathic pain is suspected if there is abnormal sensation in the area of the distribution of pain, together with a positive response to trial treatment with drugs effective for neuropathic pain. Ideally, this clinical suspicion would be supported by confirmation of a lesion at this neurolocalisation using diagnostic modalities such as MRI and neuroelectrophysiology. Alternatively, there may be a history of known trauma at that site. A variety of therapies, including analgesic, anti-inflammatory and adjuvant drugs, and neuromodulation (eg, TENS or acupuncture), can be employed to address different facets of pain pathways.Aim:This review article, aimed at primary care/ general practitioners, focuses on the identification and management of neuropathic pain in cats. Three case vignettes are included and a structured treatment algorithm is presented to guide veterinarians in tailoring interventions.Evidence base:The review draws on current literature, where available, along with the author\'s extensive experience and research.

Piriformis syndrome is a condition that is proposed to result from compression of the sciatic nerve, either in whole or in part, in the deep gluteal space by the piriformis muscle. The prevalence of piriformis syndrome depends upon the diagnostic criteria being used and the population studied but is estimated by some to be 5%-6% in all cases of low back, buttock, and leg pain and up to 17% of patients with chronic low back pain. While the sciatic nerve may pierce the piriformis muscle in about 16% of healthy individuals, this frequency is no different in those with the syndrome; thus, the relationship to this anatomic finding is unclear. The most common symptoms are buttock pain, external tenderness over the greater sciatic notch, and aggravation of the pain through sitting. Many clinical signs are reported for piriformis syndrome, but the sensitivity and specificity are unclear, in part because of the lack of a uniformly accepted case definition. In the majority of cases in the literature, it appears that the diagnosis is more ascribed to a myofascial condition rather than a focal neuropathy. Electrodiagnostic studies can be useful to exclude other causes of symptoms, but there is no well-accepted test to confirm the presence of piriformis syndrome. Ultrasound imaging may show thickening of the piriformis muscle, but further research is required to confirm that this is correlated with the clinical diagnosis. Magnetic resonance imaging and neurography may hold promise in the future, but there are not yet sufficient data to support adopting these methods as a standard diagnostic tool. The initial treatment of piriformis syndrome is typically conservative management with the general rehabilitation principles similar to other soft tissue musculoskeletal conditions. Local anesthetic, botulinum toxin, and/or corticosteroid injections have been reported by some to be beneficial for diagnostic or treatment purposes. Surgical interventions have also been used with variable success.