Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

Input: Consider Input: Context: Flare up of acute lower back pain associated with myofascial pain syndrome (MPS) may require various forms of treatment including activity restriction and bracing. Electrical twitch obtaining intramuscular stimulation (ETOIMS) is a promising new treatment. It involves the use of a strong monopolar electromyographic needle electrode for electrical stimulation of deep motor end plate zones in multiple muscles in order to elicit twitches.', 'An elite American football player with MPS symptoms failed to respond to standard treatments. He then received ETOIMS which completely alleviated the pain. After establishing pain control, the athlete continued with a further series of treatments to control symptoms of muscle tightness.
Answer: ETOIMS has a promising role in pain alleviation, increasing and maintaining range of motion, and in providing satisfactory athletic performance during long term follow up.

Output: Do electrical twitch obtaining intramuscular stimulation ( ETOIMS ) for myofascial pain syndrome in a football player?


Input: Consider Input: Context: A cross-sectional study.', 'This study aims to investigate the correlation of the cervical canal and spinal cord size, and evaluate whether the size of the spinal cord relative to the spinal canal is a risk factor for development of cervical spinal cord compression (SCC).', 'There is little knowledge regarding the relationship between cervical bony canal and spinal cord diameters. Although developmental canal stenosis has been recognized as a risk factor for SCC, the size of the spinal cord relative to the spinal canal has not been similarly discussed.', 'Cervical canal anteroposterior (AP) diameters on X-rays and AP diameters and cross-sectional areas of dural sacs and spinal cords on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were measured in 1211 healthy volunteers. Correlation between cervical canal diameter on X-rays and AP diameter and cross-sectional area of dural sacs and spinal cords on MRI were assessed. The ratio of the AP diameter of the spinal cord/dural sac was compared between subjects with and without SCC.', 'Spinal canal diameters were not highly correlated with spinal cord AP diameters and cross-sectional areas, although spinal canal diameters were significantly correlated with dural sac AP diameters. The individual difference in the ratio of the AP diameter of the spinal cord/dural sac was large (35%-93%), and the ratio was significantly larger in the subjects with SCC. An AP diameter ratio more than 62% at the C2 to C3 disc level is a risk factor for developing SCC.
Answer: The spinal cord diameter was independent of the spinal canal diameter and the relative size of a spinal cord and spinal canal differed on an individual basis. In addition, the ratio of spinal cord/dural sac in subjects with SCC was significantly larger. Therefore, a relatively large spinal cord could be a risk factor for SCC.

Output: Is relatively Large Cervical Spinal Cord for Spinal Canal a Risk factor for Development of Cervical Spinal Cord Compression : A Cross-Sectional Study of 1211 Subjects?


Input: Consider Input: Context: A descriptive case review.', 'To assess the outcomes of anterior lumbar interbody fusion for painful discs within a solid posterolateral spinal fusion.', 'Some patients continue to have pain after posterolateral spinal fusion despite apparently solid arthrodesis. One potential etiology is pain that arises from a disc within the fused levels.', 'Retrospective review of 176 patients with anterior interbody fusion, which located 20 who had anterior interbody fusion levels of prior posterolateral spinal fusion. All had low back pain, solid posterolateral spinal fusion, and painful disc(s) at the posterolateral spinal fusion level(s) but not elsewhere. Pain was measured by the Numerical Rating Scale, function by Oswestry Disability Questionnaire, and patient satisfaction by the North American Spine Society Outcome Questionnaire.', 'Follow-up data were available for 18 patients (90%). Mean follow-up was 58 months (25 to 102). There were 10 men and 8 women. Mean age was 45 years (26 to 72). Diagnoses were degenerative discs, herniated nucleus pulposus, spondylolisthesis, and spinal stenosis. Eight patients had injuries after the previous posterolateral spinal fusion that precipitated new symptoms. Two patients had one level fusion, 14 had two levels, and 1 each had three and four levels. Four patients had one prior surgery, 5 had two, and 9 had three or more. All patients had solid anterior interbody fusion by radiograph. Mean Numerical Rating Scale improved from 7.9 before surgery to 4.7 after (P< 0.001). Mean Oswestry Disability Questionnaire improved from 56.3 before surgery to 47.9 after (P = 0.04). Of 15 patients unable to work before anterior interbody fusion, 5 returned to work. Sixteen patients (89%) were satisfied with their results.
Answer: Low back pain that continues or recurs after apparently solid posterolateral spinal fusion may be caused by painful disc(s) at motion segment(s) within the fusion. A solid posterolateral spinal fusion may not protect the residual disc(s) from injury. Anterior interbody fusion can provide significant improvements in pain and function and a high degree of patient satisfaction in this clinical setting.


Output: Does anterior lumbar fusion improve discogenic pain at levels of prior posterolateral fusion?