ArticleNeurospine2025
Effectiveness of a Facet Joint Block Versus a Medial Branch Block in Spinal Pain Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Article in Neurospine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveFacet joint injections (FJIs) and medial branch blocks (MBBs) are commonly used interventions for chronic spinal pain, but their comparative effectiveness remains unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to compare the pain relief, functional improvement, complications, and patient satisfaction associated with FJI and MBB.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies were conducted. Primary outcomes included pain relief (numerical rating scale) and functional improvement (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI]/Neck Disability Index). Secondary outcomes assessed adverse effects and patient satisfaction. The differences in characteristics between patients who were readmitted and those who were not were identified and analyzed using the Review Manager software.
resultsFJI resulted in lower pain and ODI scores compared to MBB, but the differences were not statistically significant. However, patient satisfaction was significantly higher in the FJI group (odds ratio, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-3.24; p=0.04). Additionally, FJI had fewer adverse effects than MBB.
conclusionBoth FJI and MBB are effective for chronic spinal pain, but FJI may be preferred for patients seeking immediate pain relief with fewer complications. Further high-quality studies are needed to refine treatment guidelines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.