BMJ 2001;322:400-405 ( 17 February )

Primary care

Radiography of the lumbar spine in primary care patients with low back pain: randomised controlled trial

Denise Kendrick, senior lecturer, ^a Katherine Fielding, lecturer in statistics, ^b Elaine Bentley, research assistant, ^b Robert Kerslake, consultant radiologist, ^c Paul Miller, lecturer in health economics, ^b Mike Pringle, professor. ^a

^a Division of General Practice, School of Community Health Sciences, University Park, Nottingham NG7 2RD, ^b Division of Public Health Medicine and Epidemiology, Queens Medical Centre, Nottingham NG7 2UH, ^c Imaging Centre, Queens Medical Centre

Correspondence to: D Kendrick denise.kendrick{at}nottingham.ac.uk

Objective: To test the hypothesis that radiography of the lumbar spine in patients with low back pain is not associated with improved clinical outcomes or satisfaction with care.
Design: Randomised unblinded controlled trial.
Setting: 73 general practices in Nottingham, north Nottinghamshire, southern Derbyshire, north Lincolnshire, and north Leicestershire. 52 practices recruited participants to the trial.
Subjects: 421 patients with low back pain of a median duration of 10 weeks.
Intervention: Radiography of the lumbar spine.
Main outcome measures: Roland adaptation of the sickness impact profile, visual analogue scale for pain, health status, EuroQol, satisfaction with care, use of primary and secondary care services, and reporting of low back pain at three and nine months after randomisation.
Results: The intervention group were more likely to report low back pain at three months (relative risk 1.26, 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.60) and had a lower overall health status score and borderline higher Roland and pain scores. A higher proportion of participants consulted their doctor in the three months after radiography (1.62, 1.33 to 1.97). Satisfaction with care was greater in the group receiving radiography at nine but not three months after randomisation. Overall, 80% of participants in both groups at three and nine months would have radiography if the choice was available. An abnormal finding on radiography made no difference to the outcome, as measured by the Roland score.
Conclusions: Radiography of the lumbar spine in primary care patients with low back pain of at least six weeks' duration is not associated with improved patient functioning, severity of pain, or overall health status but is associated with an increase in doctor workload. Guidelines on the management of low back pain in primary care should be consistent about not recommending radiography of the lumbar spine in patients with low back pain in the absence of indicators for serious spinal disease, even if it has persisted for at least six weeks. Patients receiving radiography are more satisfied with the care they received. The challenge for primary care is to increase satisfaction without recourse to radiography.

---

© BMJ 2001
CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

Related Articles

Challenges to orthodoxy?
BMJ 2001 322: 0. [Full Text] [PDF]

Challenges to orthodoxy?
BMJ 2001 322: 0. [Full Text] [PDF]

Radiography of the lumbar spine does not improve clinical outcomes
BMJ 2001 322: 0. [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Ash, L.M., Modic, M.T., Obuchowski, N.A., Ross, J.S., Brant-Zawadzki, M.N., Grooff, P.N. (2008). Effects of Diagnostic Information, Per Se, on Patient Outcomes in Acute Radiculopathy and Low Back Pain. Am. J. Neuroradiol. 29: 1098-1103 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• CHURCH, E. J., ODLE, T. G. (2007). Diagnosis and Treatment Of back Pain. radtech 79: 126-151 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Chou, R., Qaseem, A., Snow, V., Casey, D., Cross, J. T. Jr, Shekelle, P., Owens, D. K., for the Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee, (2007). Diagnosis and Treatment of Low Back Pain: A Joint Clinical Practice Guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society. ANN INTERN MED 147: 478-491 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Refshauge, K M, Maher, C G (2006). Low back pain investigations and prognosis: a review. Br. J. Sports. Med. 40: 494-498 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Gilbert, F. J., Grant, A. M., Gillan, M. G. C., Vale, L. D., Campbell, M. K., Scott, N. W., Knight, D. J., Wardlaw, D. (2004). Low Back Pain: Influence of Early MR Imaging or CT on Treatment and Outcome--Multicenter Randomized Trial. Radiology 231: 343-351 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Underwood, M. (2004). Rapid magnetic resonance of the lumbar spine was not better than radiographs for evaluating low back pain. Evid. Based Med. 9: 19-19 [Full text]  
• Ernst, E. (2003). The Value of Diagnostic Tests for Low Back Pain. JAMA 290: 1852-1852 [Full text]  
• Car, J., Sheikh, A. (2003). Acute low back pain. BMJ 327: 541-541 [Full text]  
• Jarvik, J. G., Hollingworth, W., Martin, B., Emerson, S. S., Gray, D. T., Overman, S., Robinson, D., Staiger, T., Wessbecher, F., Sullivan, S. D., Kreuter, W., Deyo, R. A. (2003). Rapid Magnetic Resonance Imaging vs Radiographs for Patients With Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial. JAMA 289: 2810-2818 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Hadler, N. M. (2003). MRI for Regional Back Pain: Need for Less Imaging, Better Understanding. JAMA 289: 2863-2865 [Full text]  
• Deyo, R. A. (2002). Diagnostic Evaluation of LBP: Reaching a Specific Diagnosis Is Often Impossible. Arch Intern Med 162: 1444-1447 [Full text]  
• Wensing, M, Elwyn, G (2002). Research on patients' views in the evaluation and improvement of quality of care. Qual Saf Health Care 11: 153-157 [Abstract] [Full text]  
• Feder, G. (2001). Radiography led to improved patient satisfaction but increased short term pain in patients with low back pain. Evid. Based Med. 6: 145-145 [Full text]  
• (2001). Low Back Pain: Dispense with Lumbar Radiographs. JWatch General 2001: 2-2 [Full text]  

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Are physicans allowed to diagnose?

Sandy Johnston
bmj.com, 24 Feb 2001 [Full text]

A concern about your recommendations

Robert R Nesbit
bmj.com, 20 Feb 2001 [Full text]

Question

E Welch
bmj.com, 21 Feb 2001 [Full text]

Agreed! Refrain from lumbar spine x-ray

William Stevenson
bmj.com, 26 Feb 2001 [Full text]

Back pain patients' misconceptions of X-rays

Stephen Brealey
bmj.com, 28 Feb 2001 [Full text]

Re: A concern about your recommendations

Mark Struthers
bmj.com, 2 Mar 2001 [Full text]

Plain x-rays can be cost effective

Ed Charlton
bmj.com, 3 Mar 2001 [Full text]

Re: A concern about your recommendations

Denise Kendrick
bmj.com, 7 Mar 2001 [Full text]

Re: Question

Denise Kendrick
bmj.com, 7 Mar 2001 [Full text]

Re: Back pain patients' misconceptions of X-rays

Denise Kendrick
bmj.com, 7 Mar 2001 [Full text]

Re: Plain x-rays can be cost effective

Denise Kendrick
bmj.com, 7 Mar 2001 [Full text]

Choices and Dilemmas for GP's

alexander Williams
bmj.com, 10 Mar 2001 [Full text]

Interpretation of radiography of the spine in low back pain

Keith A Milligan
bmj.com, 21 Mar 2001 [Full text]

Radiography of the Lumbar spine

J F Calder, et al.
bmj.com, 6 Jul 2001 [Full text]

The importance of spinal imaging in the chronic back pain patient.

Calvin Hargis
bmj.com, 28 Sep 2001 [Full text]