Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis is a condition of progressive neurogenic claudication that can be managed with lumbar decompression surgery or less invasive interspinous process devices after failed conservative therapy. Popular interspinous process spacers include X-Stop, Vertiflex and Coflex, with X-Stop being taken off market due to its adverse events profile. Methods: A disproportionality analysis was conducted to determine whether a statistically significant signal exists in the three interspinous spacers and the reported adverse events using the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database maintained by the US Food and Drug Administration. Results: Statistically significant signals were found with each of the three interspinous spacer devices (Coflex, Vertiflex, and X-Stop) and each of the following adverse events: fracture, migration, and pain/worsening symptoms. Conclusions: Further studies such as randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the findings.

Objective Collate available evidence and provide guidance on whether to delay steroid injections after receiving a vaccine, and whether to delay vaccination if a recent steroid injection has been administered, leaving formal recommendations to various national societies. Methods A literature search was performed to identify information pertinent to steroid administration and the subsequent downstream effects on vaccine efficacy. The search was initiated on December 20, 2020 and the terms used were (steroid OR cortisone OR dexamethasone) AND (vaccine). The studies were limited to articles in the English language. Results Six studies specifically addressed the effect of steroids on vaccine efficacy. Three of the 6 studies indicated that steroids could be used during the peri-vaccine period without significant suppression of the immune response. One study associated intraarticular steroid injections with an increased risk of developing influenza even when vaccinated. The remaining two studies had mixed findings. One study showed that patients who received dexamethasone, but not prednisolone were able to mount an immune response resulting in increased IgG. Another study showed that vaccine efficacy was maintained if patients were on continuous steroids or steroids after vaccination, but not if they stopped steroids prior to vaccination. Conclusions Although there is no shared consensus in the studies reviewed, all but one study noted scenarios in which patients receiving steroids can still be successfully vaccinated.

ChatGPT and other Large Language Models (LLMs) are not only being more readily integrated into healthcare but are also being utilized more frequently by patients to answer health-related questions. Given the increased utilization for this purpose, it is essential to evaluate and study the consistency and reliability of artificial intelligence (AI) responses. Low back pain (LBP) remains one of the most frequently seen chief complaints in primary care and interventional pain management offices. This study assesses the readability, accuracy, and overall utility of ChatGPT's ability to address patients' questions concerning low back pain. Our aim is to use clinician feedback to analyze ChatGPT's responses to these common low back pain related questions, as in the future, AI will undoubtedly play a role in triaging patients prior to seeing a physician. To assess AI responses, we generated a standardized list of 25 questions concerning low back pain that were split into five categories including diagnosis, seeking a medical professional, treatment, self-treatment, and physical therapy. We explored the influence of how a prompt is worded on ChatGPT by asking questions from a 4th grader to a college/reference level. One board certified interventional pain specialist, one interventional pain fellow, and one emergency medicine resident reviewed ChatGPT's generated answers to assess accuracy and clinical utility. Readability and comprehensibility were evaluated using the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Scale. Statistical analysis was performed to analyze differences in readability scores, word count, and response complexity. How a question is phrased influences accuracy in statistically significant ways. Over-simplification of queries (e.g. to a 4th grade level) degrades ChatGPT's ability to return clinically complete responses. In contrast, reference and neutral queries preserve accuracy without additional engineering. Regardless of how the question is phrased, ChatGPT's default register trends towards technical language. Readability remains substantially misaligned with health literacy standards. Verbosity correlates with prompt type, but not necessarily accuracy. Word count is an unreliable proxy for informational completeness or clinical correctness in AI outputs and most errors stem from omission, not commission. Importantly, ChatGPT does not frequently generate false claims. This analysis complicates the assumption that “simpler is better” in prompting LLMs for clinical education. Whereas earlier work in structured conditions suggested that plain-language prompts improved accuracy, our findings indicate that a moderate reading level, not maximal simplicity, yields the most reliable outputs in complex domains like pain. This study further supports that AI LLMs can be integrated into a clinical workflow, possibly through electronic health record (EHR) software.