ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Low Back Pain: 2021 Update

A comparison of available guidelines for the detection of cauda equina syndrome and assessing the need for further clinical guidance in Ireland

The cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a rare but critical disorder, which can result in devastating motor weakness and sensory deficit, alongside often irreversible bladder, bowel and sexual dysfunction. In addition to the clinical burden of disease, this syndrome results in a disproportionately high medicolegal strain due to missed or delayed diagnoses. Despite being an emergency diagnosis, often necessitating urgent surgical decompression to treat, we believe there is a lack of clarity for clinicians in the current literature, with no published Irish guideline concerning screening or detection. The current study aims to identify and analyse appropriate guidelines in relation to CES screening which are available to clinicians in Ireland. The study design included a comprehensive literature review and comparison of existing guidelines. The review identified 13 sources of appropriate guidance for clinicians working in Ireland. These resources included textbooks, websites and guidelines developed in the UK. No Irish guidelines or advice were available on CES screening/treatment at the time of review. This review demonstrated the lack of consensus and guidance for clinicians in Ireland on how to effectively screen for CES, judge who requires further imaging and investigations and how to rule out the condition. A national consensus on thorough screening and prompt investigation for CES is necessary, and the formulation of new CES guidelines would be a welcome addition to what is available to clinicians currently.

Modern low-field MRI

This narrative review explores recent advancements and applications of modern low-field (≤ 1 Tesla) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in musculoskeletal radiology. Historically, high-field MRI systems (1.5 T and 3 T) have been the standard in clinical practice due to superior image resolution and signal-to-noise ratio. However, recent technological advancements in low-field MRI offer promising avenues for musculoskeletal imaging. General principles of low-field MRI systems are being introduced, highlighting their strengths and limitations compared to high-field counterparts. Emphasis is placed on advancements in hardware design, including novel magnet configurations, gradient systems, and radiofrequency coils, which have improved image quality and reduced susceptibility artifacts particularly in musculoskeletal imaging. Different clinical applications of modern low-field MRI in musculoskeletal radiology are being discussed. The diagnostic performance of low-field MRI in diagnosing various musculoskeletal pathologies, such as ligament and tendon injuries, osteoarthritis, and cartilage lesions, is being presented. Moreover, the discussion encompasses the cost-effectiveness and accessibility of low-field MRI systems, making them viable options for imaging centers with limited resources or specific patient populations. From a scientific standpoint, the amount of available data regarding musculoskeletal imaging at low-field strengths is limited and often several decades old. This review will give an insight to the existing literature and summarize our own experiences with a modern low-field MRI system over the last 3 years. In conclusion, the narrative review highlights the potential clinical utility, challenges, and future directions of modern low-field MRI, offering valuable insights for radiologists and healthcare professionals seeking to leverage these advancements in their practice.

Emergency Department Management of Low Back Pain: A Comparative Review of Guidelines and Practices

This narrative review examines the current best practices and guidelines for integrating pharmacologic interventions, imaging, and physiotherapy in the management of low back pain. The review also explores how patient factors such as age, sex, comorbidities, and prevalent pathologies/diagnoses influence the choice and effectiveness of these treatment approaches.

Developing an initial set of quality indicators for chiropractic care: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Quality indicators are standardized, evidence-based measures of health care quality. Currently, there is no basic set of quality indicators for chiropractic care published in peer-reviewed literature. The goal of this research is to develop a preliminary set of quality indicators, measurable with administrative data.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review searching PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, and Index to Chiropractic Literature databases. Eligible articles were published after 2011, in English, developing/reporting best practices and clinical guidelines specifically developed for, or directly applicable to, chiropractic care. Eligible non-peer-reviewed sources such as quality measures published by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Royal College of Chiropractors quality standards were also included. Following a stepwise eligibility determination process, data abstraction identified specific statements from included sources that can conceivably be measured with administrative data. Once identified, statements were transformed into potential indicators by: 1) Generating a brief title and description; 2) Documenting a source; 3) Developing a metric; and 4) Assigning a Donabedian category (structure, process, outcome). Draft indicators then traversed a 5-step assessment: 1) Describes a narrowly defined structure, process, or outcome; 2) Quantitative data can conceivably be available; 3) Performance is achievable; 4) Metric is relevant; 5) Data are obtainable within reasonable time limits. Indicators meeting all criteria were included in the final set.

RESULTS

Literature searching revealed 2562 articles. After removing duplicates and conducting eligibility determination, 18 remained. Most were clinical guidelines (n = 10) and best practice recommendations (n = 6), with 1 consensus and 1 clinical standards development study. Data abstraction and transformation produced 204 draft quality indicators. Of those, 57 did not meet 1 or more assessment criteria. After removing duplicates, 70 distinct indicators remained. Most indicators matched the Donabedian category of process (n = 35), with 31 structure and 4 outcome indicators. No sources were identified to support indicator development from patient perspectives.

CONCLUSIONS

This article proposes a preliminary set of 70 quality indicators for chiropractic care, theoretically measurable with administrative data and largely obtained from electronic health records. Future research should assess feasibility, achieve stakeholder consensus, develop additional indicators including those considering patient perspectives, and study relationships with clinical outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework, https://osf.io/t7kgm.

Development of a low back pain care pathway in an academic hospital system: results of a consensus process

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is the leading cause of disability worldwide and a significant component of healthcare expenditures. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have been highlighted as a key resource to improve the quality of care. This study aimed to develop a clinical pathway for LBP based on CPGs in an academic health system.

METHODS

We conducted a modified Delphi study of clinicians caring for patients with LBP who were asked to rate 21 CPG-informed seed statements through an online survey. The goal was to identify statements that achieved a minimum of 80% consensus among panelists.

RESULTS

Thirty-five healthcare providers participated as panelists. The majority of participants were male (68.6%), had MD or DO (62.9%) degrees, and were clinicians (73.8%) working in neurosurgery (36.1%), orthopedics (25.7%), emergency medicine (14.3%), or physical therapy (11.4%). Initially, consensus was reached on 20 of 21 seed statements. One statement did not reach consensus in the initial round and was revised into two separate statements based on feedback from panelists. One of these statements achieved consensus in the second review round. All statements reaching consensus were incorporated into a care pathway consisting of diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment for LBP.

CONCLUSION

Healthcare providers across various disciplines supported statements interpreting current CPGs related to care for LBP. This study represents a step toward supporting guideline-concordant care for LBP. Additional research is needed to assess how such pathways impact actual clinical care.

Imaging Wisely Campaign: Initiative to Reduce Imaging for Low Back Pain Across a Large Safety Net System

OBJECTIVES

Low back pain is a common clinical presentation that often results in expensive and unnecessary imaging that may lead to undue patient harm, including unnecessary procedures. We present an initiative in a safety net system to reduce imaging for low back pain.

METHODS

This quality improvement study was conducted across 70 ambulatory clinics and 11 teaching hospitals. Three electronic health record changes, using the concept of a nudge, were introduced into orders for lumbar radiography (x-ray), lumbar CT, and lumbar MRI. The primary outcome was the number of orders per 1,000 patient-days or encounters for each imaging test in the inpatient, ambulatory, and emergency department (ED) settings. Variation across facilities was assessed, along with selected indications.

RESULTS

Across all clinical environments, there were statistically significant decreases in level differences pre- and postintervention for lumbar x-ray (-52.9% for inpatient encounters, P < .001; -23.7% for ambulatory encounters, P < .001; and -17.3% for ED only encounters, P < .01). There was no decrease in ordering of lumbar CTs in the inpatient and ambulatory settings, although there was an increase in lumbar CTs in ED-only encounters. There was no difference in lumbar MRI ordering. Variation was seen across all hospitals and clinics.

DISCUSSION

Our intervention successfully decreased lumbar radiography across all clinical settings, with a reduction in lumbar CTs in the inpatient and ambulatory settings. There were no changes for lumbar MRI orders.

Physical therapist awareness of diagnostic imaging referral jurisdictional scope of practice: an observational study

OBJECTIVES

To examine physical therapist awareness and utilization of imaging referral privileges in the United States (US) and how it relates to direct access frequency.

METHODS

This study utilized survey data collected in 2020-2021 from US physical therapists. Subjects were asked about imaging referral jurisdictional authority in their state. Responses were analyzed for accuracy and compared to the level of jurisdictional authority and its impact on imaging referral. Analysis of imaging skills performance and imaging referral practices were compared to direct access frequency.

RESULTS

Only 42.0% of physical therapists practicing in states that allow imaging referral were aware of this privilege. Those practicing where imaging referral was allowed via state legislation were significantly more likely (p < 0.01) to be aware of this privilege (71.4%) compared to those granted by the state board (25.2%). Those aware of their imaging referral scope were more likely (p < 0.01) to practice imaging referral (44.5%) compared to those who were unaware (3.2%). Direct access frequency was positively associated with imaging skill performance and imaging referral practice (p < 0.01). Doctors of Physical Therapy, residency/fellowship-trained physical therapists, and board-certified physical therapists all reported practicing greater frequency of direct access (p < 0.01).

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

There is a striking lack of awareness of imaging privileges among physical therapists as influenced by the level of jurisdictional scope. These results suggest that the lack of awareness may have a dampening effect on diagnostic imaging referrals. The American Physical Therapy Association should consider engaging with state boards to raise imaging privilege awareness.

Diagnostic accuracy of lumbar CT and MRI in the evaluation of chronic low back pain without red flag symptoms

BACKGROUND

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most frequent reasons for medical consultation. Most of the patients will have nonspecific LBP, which usually are self-limited episodes. It is unclear which of the diagnostic imaging pathways is most effective and costeffective and how the imaging impacts on patient treatment. Imaging techniques are usually indicated if symptoms remain after 6 weeks. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the diagnostic imaging examination of choice in lumbar spine evaluation of low back pain; however, availability of MRI is limited.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of computed tomography (CT) with MRI (as standard of reference) in the evaluation of chronic low back pain (LBP) without red flags symptoms. To compare the results obtained by two radiologists with different grades of experience.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with chronic low back pain without red flags symptoms were retrospectively reviewed by two observers with different level of experience. Patients included had undergone a lumbar or abdominal CT and an MRI within a year. Once the radiological information was collected, it was then statistically reviewed. The aim of the statistical analysis is to identify the equivalence between both diagnostic techniques. To this end, sensitivity, specificity and validity index were calculated. In addition, intra and inter-observer reliability were measured by Cohen's kappa values and also using the McNemar test.

RESULTS

340 lumbar levels were evaluated from 68 adult patients with chronic low back pain or sciatica. 63.2% of them were women, with an average age of 60.3 years (SD 14.7). CT shows high values of sensitivity and specificity (>80%) in most of the items evaluated, but sensitivity was low for the evaluation of density of the disc (40%) and for the detection of disc herniation (55%). Moreover, agreement between MRI and CT in most of these items was substantial or almost perfect (Cohen's kappa-coefficient > 0'8), excluding Modic changes (kappa = 0.497), degenerative changes (kappa0.688), signal of the disc (kappa = 0.327) and disc herniation (kappa = 0.639). Finally, agreement between both observers is mostly high (kappa > 0.8). Foraminal stenosis, canal stenosis and the grade of the canal stenosis were overdiagnosed by the inexperienced observer in the evaluation of CT images.

CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE

CT is as sensitive as lumbar MRI in the evaluation of most of the items analysed, excluding Modic changes, degenerative changes, signal of the disc and disc herniation. In addition, these results are obtained regardless the experience of the radiologist. The rising use of diagnostic medical imaging and the improvement of image quality brings the opportunity of making a second look of abdominal CT in search of causes of LBP. Thereby, inappropriate medical imaging could be avoided (2). In addition, it would allow to reduce MRI waiting list and prioritize other patients with more severe pathology than LBP.

Update on Pediatric Spine Imaging

The spine is often difficult to evaluate clinically in children, increasing the importance of diagnostic imaging to detect a wide variety of spinal disorders ranging from congenital abnormalities to severe infections. Clinical history and physical examination can help determine whether imaging is needed and which imaging technique would be best. The most common cause for back pain, even in children, is muscular strain/spasm that does not require any imaging. However, red flags such as pain at age < 5 years, constant pain, night pain, radicular pain, pain lasting > 4 weeks, or an abnormal neurologic examination may require further investigation. Imaging can be of great value for diagnosis but must be interpreted along with the clinical history, physical examination, and laboratory findings to achieve an accurate diagnosis. We discuss imaging for the most common and/or important spine pathologies in children: congenital and developmental pathologies, trauma, infectious processes, inflammatory causes, and tumors.

Management of acute non-specific low back pain in the emergency department: do emergency physicians follow the guidelines? Results of a cross-sectional survey

OBJECTIVES

Clinical guidelines for acute non-specific low back pain (LBP) recommend avoiding imaging studies or invasive treatments and to advise patients to stay active. The aim of this study was to evaluate the management of acute non-specific LBP in the emergency departments (ED).

SETTING

We invited all department chiefs of Swiss EDs and their physician staff to participate in a web-based survey using two clinical case vignettes of patients with acute non-specific LBP presenting to an ED. In both cases, no neurological deficits or red flags were present. Guideline adherence and low-value care was defined based on current guideline recommendations.

RESULTS

In total, 263 ED physicians completed at least one vignette, while 212 completed both vignettes (43% residents, 32% senior/attending physicians and 24% chief physicians). MRI was considered in 31% in vignette 1 and 65% in vignette 2. For pain management, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, paracetamol and metamizole were mostly used. A substantial proportion of ED physicians considered treatments with questionable benefit and/or increased risk for adverse events such as oral steroids (vignette 1, 12% and vignette 2, 19%), muscle relaxants (33% and 38%), long-acting strong opioids (25% and 33%) and spinal injections (22% and 43%). Although guidelines recommend staying active, 72% and 67% of ED physicians recommended activity restrictions.

CONCLUSION

Management of acute non-specific LBP in the ED was not in agreement with current guideline recommendations in a substantial proportion of ED physicians. Overuse of imaging studies, the use of long-acting opioids and muscle relaxants, as well as recommendations for activity and work restrictions were prevalent and may potentially be harmful.

Care for the patient with low back pain

ABSTRACT

Low back pain (LBP) continues to be one of the most common conditions leading patients to seek medical care globally. The NP is on the frontline, playing an integral role in caring for patients with LBP. Understanding the etiology of LBP is essential in the treatment.

Image-Guided Spine Interventions for Pain: Ongoing Controversies

An expanding array of image-guided spine interventions have the potential to provide immediate and effective pain relief. Innovations in spine intervention have proceeded rapidly, with clinical adoption of new techniques at times occurring before the development of bodies of evidence to establish efficacy. Although new spine interventions have been evaluated by clinical trials, acceptance of results has been hindered by controversies regarding trial methodology. This article explores controversial aspects of four categories of image-guided interventions for painful conditions: spine interventions for postdural puncture headache resulting from prior lumbar procedures, epidural steroid injections for cervical and lumbar radiculopathy, interventions for facet and sacroiliac joint pain, and vertebral augmentations for compression fractures. For each intervention, we summarize the available literature, with an emphasis on persistent controversies, and discuss how current areas of disagreement and challenge may shape future research and innovation. Despite the ongoing areas of debate regarding various aspects of these procedures, effective treatments continue to emerge and show promise for aiding relief of a range of debilitating conditions.

Imaging Recommendations for Diagnosis, Staging and Management of Treatment-Related Complications in Cancer

Precision medicine is becoming increasingly common in oncology, with treatments tailored to individual patients and cancer. By integrating these underlying concepts of health care, chemotherapy and radiotherapy can be tailored to improve safety and efficacy. On the other hand, oncology treatment regimens may result in local and systemic changes and complications depending on the type of treatment. For the proper and prompt management of cancer patients, it is essential to interpret this posttreatment imaging correctly. This article aims at guiding treating physicians to be able to distinguish complications from expected posttreatment changes.

Does lumbar MRI predict degree of disability in patients with degenerative disc disease? A prospective cross-sectional study at University of Gondar comprehensive specialized hospital, North West Ethiopia, 2020

Background

Low back pain (LBP) is one of the most serious public health problem globally with substantial socioeconomic implications. Degenerative disc disease is an important cause of LBP in the elderly. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is routinely ordered by physicians in evaluation of patients with suspected degenerative disc disease in the lumbar spine. However there is no unanimous agreement in the literatures when it comes to the association of degree of disability to that of severity of lumbar MRI findings.

Objective

The aim of this study is to assess the association between degree of disability measured using Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and findings on lumbar spine MRI in patients with degenerative disc disease at University of Gondar comprehensive Specialized Hospital, North West Ethiopia, 2020.

Methods and materials

A prospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 72 consecutively enrolled patients with degenerative disc disease who underwent lumbar MRI scan. Degree of disability was measured using ODI questionnaire translated to local language. Association between lumbar spine MRI parameters and ODI score and category was tested using Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient and Chi square tests.

Results

The mean age of the study subjects was 43.81 ± 1.88 years (range 22–83 years). Forty-three (59.7%) of the study population were female. In terms of ODI category, most fell under minimal 33 (45.8%) or moderate 25 (34.7%) disability. Disc bulge (81.9%) and foraminal stenosis were the most frequent MRI abnormalities detected. ODI score showed weak correlation with grade of spinal canal stenosis. Grade of foraminal stenosis showed no correlation with ODI score.

Conclusion

The clinical relevance of MRI findings in predicting degree of disability in patients with degenerative disc disease is limited and MRI study should be sparingly ordered in evaluation of these patients particularly in resource constrained settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12880-022-00866-7.

[Imaging of the musculoskeletal system using low-field magnetic resonance imaging]

BACKGROUND

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) plays a crucial role in musculoskeletal imaging. The high prevalence and pain-related suffering of patients pose a particular challenge concerning availability and turnover times, respectively. Low-field (≤ 1.0 T) MRI has the potential to fulfill these needs. However, during the past three decades, high field systems have increasingly replaced low field systems because of their limitations in image quality. Recent technological advancements in high-performance hard- and software promise musculoskeletal imaging with adequate quality at lower field strengths for several regions and indications.

OBJECTIVES

The goal is to provide insight into the advantages and disadvantages of low-field musculoskeletal imaging, discuss the current literature, and include our first experiences with a modern 0.55 T MRI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review is based on research in various literature databases and our own musculoskeletal imaging experiences with a modern 0.55 T scanner.

CONCLUSION

Most publications pertaining to musculoskeletal imaging at low-field strength MRI are outdated, and studies regarding the diagnostic performance of modern low-field MRI systems are needed. These new systems may complement existing high-field systems and make MRI more accessible, even in low-income countries. From our own experience, modern low-field MRI seems to be adequate in musculoskeletal imaging, especially in acute injuries.