23
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Emergency Physicians Choose Wisely When Ordering Plain Radiographs for Low Back Pain Patients

      research-article
      1 , , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5
      ,
      Cureus
      Cureus
      low back pain, choosing wisely, imaging, plain radiographs, emergency medicine

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          The Choosing Wisely Canada (CWC) Emergency Medicine group recommends avoidance of lumbosacral radiographs for patients with non-traumatic low back pain (LBP) in the absence of red flags. The objective of this study was to evaluate imaging practices of emergency physicians (EPs) in four Calgary emergency departments (EDs) and identify patient, physician, and environmental factors associated with over-ordering of radiographs for low-risk LBP patients.

          Methods

          Data was retrospectively collected from patients, ages 18–50 and Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale (CTAS) codes 2–5, who presented with non-traumatic LBP to Calgary EDs from April 1, 2014 to March 31, 2016. Patients considered high risk, specifically with partial thromboplastin time (PTT) > 40 seconds or international normalized ratio (INR) > 1.2 seconds, any consult, admission to hospital, and history of cancer, were excluded. The primary outcome was to establish the overall usage of lumbosacral radiographs. The secondary outcome was to identify factors that influenced lumbosacral spine imaging.

          Results

          Data from 2128 low-risk patients showed that 14.8% of the patients received lumbosacral radiographs. Variation among 132 physicians in X-ray ordering ranged from 0% to 90.9%. There were site-specific differences in ordering patterns [Rockyview General Hospital (RGH) = 21.6% > South Health Campus (SHC) = 15.6% > Peter Lougheed Centre (PLC) = 13.1% > Foothills Medical Centre (FMC) = 9.7%, p < 0.001]. Canadian College of Family Physicians-Emergency Medicine (CCFP-EM) licensed physicians ordered more X-rays compared to Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians of Canada (FRCPC) licensed physicians (16.6% vs. 11.1%, p < 0.001). Older physicians and physicians with more experience ordered more X-rays than their younger and less experienced colleagues.

          Conclusion

          Considerable variation exists in the ordering practices of Calgary EPs. Overall, EPs seem to be choosing wisely in terms of ordering plain radiographs for non-traumatic LBP.

          Related collections

          Most cited references15

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Expenditures and health status among adults with back and neck problems.

          Back and neck problems are among the symptoms most commonly encountered in clinical practice. However, few studies have examined national trends in expenditures for back and neck problems or related these trends to health status measures. To estimate inpatient, outpatient, emergency department, and pharmacy expenditures related to back and neck problems in the United States from 1997 through 2005 and to examine associated trends in health status. Age- and sex-adjusted analysis of the nationally representative Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS) from 1997 to 2005 using complex survey regression methods. The MEPS is a household survey of medical expenditures weighted to represent national estimates. Respondents were US adults (> 17 years) who self-reported back and neck problems (referred to as "spine problems" based on MEPS descriptions and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification definitions). Spine-related expenditures for health services (inflation-adjusted); annual surveys of self-reported health status. National estimates were based on annual samples of survey respondents with and without self-reported spine problems from 1997 through 2005. A total of 23 045 respondents were sampled in 1997, including 3139 who reported spine problems. In 2005, the sample included 22 258 respondents, including 3187 who reported spine problems. In 1997, the mean age- and sex-adjusted medical costs for respondents with spine problems was $4695 (95% confidence interval [CI], $4181-$5209), compared with $2731 (95% CI, $2557-$2904) among those without spine problems (inflation-adjusted to 2005 dollars). In 2005, the mean age- and sex- adjusted medical expenditure among respondents with spine problems was $6096 (95% CI, $5670-$6522), compared with $3516 (95% CI, $3266-$3765) among those without spine problems. Total estimated expenditures among respondents with spine problems increased 65% (adjusted for inflation) from 1997 to 2005, more rapidly than overall health expenditures. The estimated proportion of persons with back or neck problems who self-reported physical functioning limitations increased from 20.7% (95% CI, 19.9%-21.4%) to 24.7% (95% CI, 23.7%-25.6%) from 1997 to 2005. Age- and sex-adjusted self-reported measures of mental health, physical functioning, work or school limitations, and social limitations among adults with spine problems were worse in 2005 than in 1997. In this survey population, self-reported back and neck problems accounted for a large proportion of health care expenditures. These spine-related expenditures have increased substantially from 1997 to 2005, without evidence of corresponding improvement in self-assessed health status.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Early Trends Among Seven Recommendations From the Choosing Wisely Campaign.

            The Choosing Wisely campaign consists of more than 70 lists produced by specialty societies of medical practices or procedures of minimal clinical benefit to patients in most situations, with recommendations regarding judicious use.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Diagnostic evaluation of low back pain with emphasis on imaging.

              To review evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of clinical information and imaging for patients with low back pain in primary care settings. MEDLINE search (January 1966 to September 2001) for articles and reviews relevant to the accuracy of the clinical and radiographic examination of patients with low back pain. The authors reviewed abstracts and selected articles for review on the basis of a combined judgment. Data on the clinical examination were based primarily on recent systematic reviews; data on imaging tests were based primarily on original articles. Diagnostic results were extracted by one or the other author. Quality of methods was evaluated informally. Major potential biases were identified, but neither quantitative data extraction nor scoring was done. Formal meta-analysis was not used because the diagnostic hardware and software, gold standards, and patient selection methods were heterogeneous and the number of studies was small. Sensitivity for cancer was highest for magnetic resonance imaging (0.83 to 0.93) and radionuclide scanning (0.74 to 0.98); specificity was highest for magnetic resonance imaging (0.9 to 0.97) and radiography (0.95 to 0.99). Magnetic resonance imaging was the most sensitive (0.96) and specific (0.92) test for infection. The sensitivity and specificity of magnetic resonance imaging for herniated discs were slightly higher than those for computed tomography but very similar for the diagnosis of spinal stenosis. The data suggest a diagnostic strategy similar to the 1994 Agency for Health Care Policy and Research guidelines. For adults younger than 50 years of age with no signs or symptoms of systemic disease, symptomatic therapy without imaging is appropriate. For patients 50 years of age and older or those whose findings suggest systemic disease, plain radiography and simple laboratory tests can almost completely rule out underlying systemic diseases. Advanced imaging should be reserved for patients who are considering surgery or those in whom systemic disease is strongly suspected.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cureus
                Cureus
                2168-8184
                Cureus
                Cureus (Palo Alto (CA) )
                2168-8184
                10 August 2018
                August 2018
                : 10
                : 8
                : e3126
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, CAN
                [2 ] Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN
                [3 ] Alberta Health Services, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN
                [4 ] Information Technology, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN
                [5 ] Emergency Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, CAN
                Author notes
                Article
                10.7759/cureus.3126
                6181247
                45ddc956-9d4d-4c01-b042-f30d468a5003
                Copyright © 2018, Hiranandani et al.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 1 August 2018
                : 10 August 2018
                Categories
                Emergency Medicine
                Quality Improvement

                low back pain,choosing wisely,imaging,plain radiographs,emergency medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article