Levator ani trigger point injections: An underutilized treatment for chronic pelvic pain.

AIMS: We conducted this study to examine the role of trigger point injections in females with chronic pelvic pain (CPP) of at least 6 months duration and specific levator ani trigger points. METHODS: This prospective study included 18 consecutive female patients with CPP and specific palpable levator ani trigger points. Pain was evaluated before and after trigger point injection on a Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Patient global satisfaction (PGS) and cure rates (PGC) were also measured by a VAS on a scale of 0-100%. The trigger points were identified manually by intravaginal palpation of the levator ani bilaterally. A mixture of 10 cc of 0.25% bupivacaine, 10 cc of 2% lidocaine and 1 cc (40 mg) of triamcinolone was used for injection of 5 cc per trigger point. A 5.5'' Iowa trumpet pudendal needle guide was used for injection. All but one injection were performed in the office setting without sedation. Pelvic floor muscle exercises were taught for use after injection. Success was defined as a decrease in pain as measured by a VAS of 50% or more, as well as PGS and PGC scores of 60% or greater. There was a mean follow up of 3 months after trigger point injection. RESULTS: Thirteen of 18 women improved with the first trigger point injection resulting in a comprehensive success rate of 72%. Six (33%) of 18 women were completely pain free. CONCLUSION: In the management of CPP, a non-surgical office-based therapy such as trigger point injections can be effective in selected patients.

How accurate are health care workers' perceptions of patient suffering? A pilot study.

Health care workers' perceptions of patient suffering have not been well studied. Patients and health care workers were invited to answer a single, open-ended question. To develop a survey tool that could be validated and used for future research, what health care workers thought causes or caused the most suffering for patients was compared with what patients actually identified as the cause of their worst suffering. Health care workers underestimated loss and significantly underestimated physical nonpainful symptoms as causes of maximal suffering. Communication, emotional, and systems issues were often overestimated by health care workers. Health care workers may not accurately perceive what causes the worst suffering for patients. More studies are needed.

Hemodialysis is as effective as hemoperfusion for drug removal in carbamazepine poisoning.

Although most authors recommend charcoal hemoperfusion (CHP) for the removal of carbamazepine (CBZ) in acute CBZ poisoning, we present a case where we had the chance to compare CHP with hemodialysis (HD). A 50-year-old white man with normal renal function ingested an unknown quantity of CBZ with lithium. He was dialyzed for 3 h and his serum CBZ level was reduced by 27.7%. Four hours later he also had a 3-hour CHP which further reduced his CBZ level by 25.3%. Therefore we conclude that HD with high-flux dialyzers is at least as effective as CHP for the removal of CBZ from the blood after CBZ intoxication.