1. Make sure the guidance addresses the same problem
The 2025 AAN review evaluates epidural steroid injections for radiculopathy and spinal stenosis. A separate 2025 BMJ guideline addresses commonly used interventions for chronic non-cancer spine pain. These are overlapping but not identical questions. The BMJ chronic-pain scope should not be casually extended to acute pain, cancer-related pain, or inflammatory disease.
Ask your physician to identify the population that most closely matches you. Record the diagnosis, symptom duration, and dominant complaint. A recommendation about persistent axial back pain may not answer the same question as one about a specific nerve-root syndrome. Precision here matters more than the headline attached to the guideline.
Sources: Epidural steroid injections for chronic back pain: An AAN systematic review · Commonly used interventional procedures for non-cancer chronic spine pain: a clinical practice guideline
2. Separate pain relief from other outcomes
The AAN review describes limited benefits that vary by condition and by whether the outcome is pain or disability. That distinction is important when discussing what a procedure might accomplish. Ask whether the expected result is less pain, better function, an opportunity to participate in rehabilitation, or information for another decision.
Define what would be worthwhile to you before comparing studies. For one person, a meaningful goal may be completing a particular activity; for another, the treatment burden may outweigh a brief improvement. The consultation should make those preferences visible instead of treating every measured change as equally valuable.
Sources: Epidural steroid injections for chronic back pain: An AAN systematic review
3. Ask how a recommendation was reached
A guideline does more than list studies. It interprets benefits, harms, uncertainty, and practical burden for a defined population. The 2025 BMJ guideline recommends against the spine interventions it evaluated for that chronic-pain population. Ask your clinician to explain any different recommendation and the evidence or patient circumstances behind it.
You do not need to adjudicate every research method. Useful questions include whether the comparison was against a sham procedure, usual care, or another treatment, and whether follow-up was long enough to address your goal. Ask which limitations most affect confidence in the proposed plan. Check the date of the guidance being discussed and ask whether a newer review has changed the recommendation or highlighted a remaining disagreement.
Sources: Commonly used interventional procedures for non-cancer chronic spine pain: a clinical practice guideline · Low back pain and sciatica in over 16s: assessment and management — recommendations
4. Keep safety and effectiveness as separate questions
A procedure can have a well-developed safety protocol without being the most useful treatment for a particular patient. Conversely, a possible benefit does not remove the need to discuss individual risks. Ask for both explanations rather than accepting technical expertise as the entire rationale.
Tell the team about blood thinners, diabetes, recent infection, and previous procedure reactions. Ask how preparation and aftercare would be organized if you proceed. If the expected benefit is small or uncertain, the time, cost, travel, and recovery burden may become especially important parts of your decision.
Sources: Updates to the ASRA Guidelines for Interventional Pain Procedures · Preprocedural Recommendations for Reducing Surgical Site Infections
5. Put testimonials in the right place
Patient stories can describe feeling heard, receiving a clear explanation, or experiencing relief. They cannot tell you what would have happened without the procedure or predict your individual result. A positive review is useful context about care experience, not a substitute for comparative evidence.
Bring a story that resonated with you and explain why. Was it the ability to walk again, the confidence in a clinician, or the responsiveness afterward? Ask which parts are realistic goals for your circumstances. This lets a personal account start a useful conversation without turning it into a treatment promise.
Sources: Epidural steroid injections for chronic back pain: An AAN systematic review · Commonly used interventional procedures for non-cancer chronic spine pain: a clinical practice guideline
6. Make a decision with a stopping rule
Ask what reasonable alternatives remain, including rehabilitation or other nonprocedural care. If you choose an intervention, agree in advance on what will be measured, when it will be reviewed, and what would argue against repeating it. If you decline, ask how symptoms and function will be followed instead.
We encourage patients to request an explanation they can repeat in plain language: why this treatment, why now, and what comes next if it does not help. A good decision can acknowledge uncertainty. What matters is that the uncertainty is discussed openly and connected to a plan rather than hidden behind a confident claim.
Sources: Back Pain: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Steps to Take · Low back pain and sciatica in over 16s: assessment and management — recommendations
Make the most of your visit
Questions to bring to your consultation
Choose the questions that matter most to you. Bring them along, and ask us to explain anything that is unclear.
- Which guideline population most closely matches my diagnosis and symptom duration?
- Are we aiming to improve pain, function, or diagnostic clarity?
- Why does your recommendation differ from guidance that advises against this intervention?
- What evidence limitation matters most in my situation?
- How do my health conditions change the risks and treatment burden?
- What alternatives remain if I decide against the procedure?
- What would make us stop rather than repeat treatment?
Sources & further reading
- Epidural steroid injections for chronic back pain: An AAN systematic reviewAmerican Academy of Neurology
- Commonly used interventional procedures for non-cancer chronic spine pain: a clinical practice guidelineBMJ / international guideline panel
- Low back pain and sciatica in over 16s: assessment and management — recommendationsNICE
- Updates to the ASRA Guidelines for Interventional Pain ProceduresASRA Pain Medicine
- Preprocedural Recommendations for Reducing Surgical Site InfectionsASRA Pain Medicine
- Back Pain: Diagnosis, Treatment, and Steps to TakeNIH / NIAMS
We use these medical sources to help explain your options and prepare you for a conversation with our team. Our guides feature our own clinicians; patient reviews describe individual experiences.
