Table 3. Methodological Quality Assessment of Randomized Trials of Interventional Pain Management Utilizing Interventional Pain Management Techniques-Quality Appraisal of Reliability and Risk of Bias Assessment (IPM–QRB) a.
| Variables | Manchikanti et al. (52) | Heavner et al. (54) | Manchikanti et al. (55) | Manchikanti et al. (76) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| I. Consort or Spirit | ||||
| Trial Design Guidance and Reporting | 3 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| II. Design Factors | ||||
| Type and Design of Trial | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| Setting/Physician | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Imaging | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| Sample Size | 3 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| Statistical Methodology | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| III. Patient Factors | ||||
| Inclusiveness of Population | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Duration of Pain | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Previous Treatments | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Duration of Follow-up with Appropriate Interventions | 3 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
| IV. Outcomes | ||||
| Outcomes Assessment Criteria for Significant Improvement | 4 | 2 | 4 | 2 |
| Analysis of all Randomized Participants in the Groups | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| Description of Drop Out Rate | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Similarity of Groups at Baseline for Important Prognostic Indicators | 2 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| Role of Co-Interventions | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| V. Randomization | ||||
| Method of Randomization | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| VI. Allocation Concealment | ||||
| Concealed Treatment Allocation | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| VII. Blinding | ||||
| Patient Blinding | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Care Provider Blinding | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Outcome Assessor Blinding | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| VIII. Conflicts OF Interest | ||||
| Funding and Sponsorship | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| Conflicts of Interest | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 |
| Total | 41 | 37 | 40 | 13 |
a Source: Manchikanti L, Hirsch JA, Cohen SP, Heavener JE, Falco FJE, Diwan S, et al. Assessment of methodologic quality of randomized trials of interventional techniques: Development of an interventional pain management specific instrument. Pain Physician. 2014; 17 (3): E263-90 (61).