The Effect of Midazolam Sedation on Diagnostic Medial Branch Blocks (MBB)

March 3, 2022 updated by: Katherine Nowak, Henry Ford Health System

A Prospective Study Investigating the Effect of Midazolam Sedation on Diagnostic Lumbar Medial Branch Blocks

This prospective observational study aims to investigate the effect of midazolam sedation on the diagnostic validity of diagnostic lumbar medial branch block in patients diagnosed with lumbar spondylosis without myelopathy.

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

This prospective observational study aims to investigate the effects of midazolam sedation on the diagnostic validity of lumbar medial branch blocks in patients diagnosed with lumbar spondylosis without myelopathy. Patients typically receive two subsequent diagnostic blocks prior RFTC, to ensure that the correct location has been targeted. When patients achieve at least 80% pain relief after both diagnostic blocks, this is considered a positive result and they can proceed to receive RFTC. If patients have positive diagnostic blocks but their RFTC is not successful, this is considered a false positive diagnostic result. This study will determine 1) if a higher number of sedated patients proceed to radiofrequency thermocoagulation (RFTC) than non-sedated patients, and 2) if there are a higher number of false positive results in sedated patients. The hypothesis is that the use of midazolam sedation will increase the number of patients who perceive to have pain relief from their diagnostic block results, resulting in more patients proceeding to RFTC, and that there will be a higher number of false positive results in sedated patients. The primary outcome measure is the number of sedated versus non-sedated patients that have positive block results. A positive result will be calculated by having at least one NRS score that is at least 80% lower than their baseline NRS score in the 8 hours following lumbar MBB. The secondary outcome will be the number of false positive blocks in sedated versus non-sedated patients. After patients achieve 80% relief after each of the two diagnostic lumbar medial branch blocks and proceeds with lumbar RFTC, we will then collect NRS scores 24 hours after both diagnostic Lumbar MBB, and 4 weeks and at 8 weeks after the lumbar RFTC. If a patient has not received at least 50% reduction from their baseline NRS score by 8 weeks, this will be considered a false positive. A 7-point Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) score 8 hours after each Lumbar MBB will also be collected, and at 4 weeks and 8 weeks after the lumbar RFTC, and any adverse effects patients experience. In addition, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) will be collected at 4 and 8 weeks after lumbar RFTC. The results of this study will help guide the use of sedation when performing diagnostic blocks on patients with lumbar spondylosis, in order to reduce the number of false positive blocks.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Observational

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
95

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • United States
    • Michigan
      • Detroit, Michigan, United States, 48201
        • Henry Ford Health System

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Sampling Method

Non-Probability Sample

Study Population

Adult patients diagnosed with Lumbar Spondylosis without Myelopathy at either of five study locations (HFMC - Ford Rd, HFMC Main, HFMC West Bloomfield, HFMC Pierson, HFMC - Jackson) from June 1st, 2020 - June 1st, 2021.

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Adult patients at least 18 years of age
  • History of axial low back pain for at least 3 months
  • Indication for bilateral lumbar medial branch block (L3, L4, L5 medial branch nerves)
  • Diagnosis of Lumbar Spondylosis without Myelopathy >4/10 pain on a 0-10 numerical rating scale (NRS)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Low back pain with radiculopathy symptoms (this is a diagnosis of sciatica and treatment is not with lumbar medial branch block)
  • Uncontrolled major depression or other mental health issues causing instability
  • Pregnant or lactating women
  • <18 years old
  • History of adverse reaction to either midazolam, lidocaine, or bupivacaine
  • Focal neurological deficits, cognitive impairments, or memory issues
  • Non-English speaking
  • Hearing impaired that are unable to understand verbal instructions
  • Active Infection
  • On Anticoagulation or Antiplatelet Therapy
  • History of Clotting Disorder
  • Previous Lumbar Medial Branch Block and/or Lumbar Radiofrequency Ablation

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Observational Models: Case-Control
  • Time Perspectives: Prospective

Cohorts and Interventions

Group / Cohort

Group / Cohort

A group or subgroup of participants in an observational study that is assessed for biomedical or health outcomes.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
No sedation
Patients who will undergo the diagnostic lumbar medial branch blocks without sedation (control group).
Sedation
Patients who will undergo the diagnostic lumbar medial branch blocks with midazolam sedation (treatment group).
Drug: Midazolam
Midazolam given as a sedative during diagnostic lumbar medial branch block
Other Names:
  • sedation

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of positive blocks
Time Frame: 8 hours post diagnostic block
The number of positive diagnostic lumbar medial branch blocks (defined by at least 80% pain relief) in patients who receive midazolam sedation during their diagnostic blocks will be compared to patients who do not receive sedation.
8 hours post diagnostic block

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of false positive blocks
Time Frame: 2.5-3 months
The number of false positive diagnostic lumbar medial branch blocks (defined by at least 80% pain relief in the two diagnostic blocks, and then less than 80% pain relief following the subsequent radiofrequency thermocoagulation treatment) in patients who receive midazolam sedation during their diagnostic blocks will be compared to patients who do not receive sedation.
2.5-3 months

Other Outcome Measures

Other Outcome Measures

For clinical trials, a planned measurement described in the protocol that is used to determine the effect of an intervention/treatment on participants. For observational studies, a measurement or observation that is used to describe patterns of diseases or traits, or associations with exposures, risk factors, or treatment. Types of outcome measures include primary outcome measure and secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Patient Global Impression of Change-7 (PGIC-7) scores
Time Frame: 24 hours post diagnostic block; 4 and 8 weeks after radiofrequency thermocoagulation
The PGIC-7 scores of patients who received sedation will be compared to those who did not receive sedation during their diagnostic lumbar medial branch block.
24 hours post diagnostic block; 4 and 8 weeks after radiofrequency thermocoagulation
Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores
Time Frame: 4 and 8 weeks after radiofrequency thermocoagulation
The ODI scores of patients who received sedation will be compared to those who did not receive sedation during their diagnostic lumbar medial branch block.
4 and 8 weeks after radiofrequency thermocoagulation

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Henry Ford Health System

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
June 25, 2020

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
September 1, 2021

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
October 15, 2021

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
June 27, 2020

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
June 27, 2020

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
July 1, 2020

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
March 7, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
March 3, 2022

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
March 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • 14010

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

Yes

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

product manufactured in and exported from the U.S.

Yes

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings