259 research outputs found

    Longitudinal associations between incident lumbar spine MRI findings and chronic low back pain or radicular symptoms: retrospective analysis of data from the longitudinal assessment of imaging and disability of the back (LAIDBACK)

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: There are few longitudinal cohort studies examining associations between incident MRI findings and incident spine-related symptom outcomes. Prior studies do not discriminate between the two distinct outcomes of low back pain (LBP) and radicular symptoms. To address this gap in the literature, we conducted a secondary analysis of existing data from the Longitudinal Assessment of Imaging and Disability of the Back (LAIDBACK). The purpose of this study was to examine the association of incident lumbar MRI findings with two specific spine-related symptom outcomes: 1) incident chronic bothersome LBP, and 2) incident radicular symptoms such as pain, weakness, or sensation alterations in the lower extremity. METHODS: The original LAIDBACK study followed 123 participants without current LBP or sciatica, administering standardized MRI assessments of the lumbar spine at baseline and at 3-year follow-up, and collecting information on participant-reported spine-related symptoms and signs every 4 months for 3 years. These analyses examined bivariable and multivariable associations between incident MRI findings and symptom outcomes (LBP and radicular symptoms) using logistic regression. RESULTS: Three-year cumulative incidence of new MRI findings ranged between 2 and 8%, depending on the finding. Incident annular fissures were associated with incident chronic LBP, after adjustment for prior back pain and depression (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 6.6; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-36.9). All participants with incident disc extrusions (OR 5.4) and nerve root impingement (OR 4.1) reported incident radicular symptoms, although associations were not statistically significant. No other incident MRI findings showed large magnitude associations with symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Even when applying more specific definitions for spine-related symptom outcomes, few MRI findings showed large magnitude associations with symptom outcomes. Although incident annular fissures, disc extrusions, and nerve root impingement were associated with incident symptom outcomes, the 3-year incidence of these MRI findings was extremely low, and did not explain the vast majority of incident symptom cases

    Consumer understanding of terms used in imaging reports requested for low back pain: a cross-sectional survey

    Get PDF
    OBJECTIVES: To investigate (1) self-reported societal comprehension of common and usually non-serious terms found in lumbar spine imaging reports and (2) its relationship to perceived seriousness, likely persistence of low back pain (LBP), fear of movement, back beliefs and history and intensity of LBP. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey of the general public. SETTING: Five English-speaking countries: UK, USA, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. PARTICIPANTS: Adults (age >18 years) with or without a history of LBP recruited in April 2019 with quotas for country, age and gender. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Self-reported understanding of 14 terms (annular fissure, disc bulge, disc degeneration, disc extrusion, disc height loss, disc protrusion, disc signal loss, facet joint degeneration, high intensity zone, mild canal stenosis, Modic changes, nerve root contact, spondylolisthesis and spondylosis) commonly found in lumbar spine imaging reports. For each term, we also elicited worry about its seriousness, and whether its presence would indicate pain persistence and prompt fear of movement. RESULTS: From 774 responses, we included 677 (87.5%) with complete and valid responses. 577 (85%) participants had a current or past history of LBP of whom 251 (44%) had received lumbar spine imaging. Self-reported understanding of all terms was poor. At best, 235 (35%) reported understanding the term ‘disc degeneration’, while only 71 (10.5%) reported understanding the term ‘Modic changes’. For all terms, a moderate to large proportion of participants (range 59%–71%), considered they indicated a serious back problem, that pain might persist (range 52%–71%) and they would be fearful of movement (range 42%–57%). CONCLUSION: Common and usually non-serious terms in lumbar spine imaging reports are poorly understood by the general population and may contribute to the burden of LBP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12619000545167

    Consensus conference on core radiological parameters to describe lumbar stenosis - an initiative for structured reporting

    Get PDF
    Purpose: To define radiological criteria and parameters as a minimum standard in a structured radiological report for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and to identify criteria and parameters for research purposes. Material and methods: All available radiological criteria and parameters for LSS were identified using systematic literature reviews and a Delphi survey. We invited to the consensus meeting, and provided data, to 15 internationally renowned experts from different countries. During the meeting, these experts reached consensus in a structured and systematic discussion about a core list of radiological criteria and parameters for standard reporting. Results: We identified a total of 27 radiological criteria and parameters for LSS. During the meeting, the experts identified five of these as core items for a structured report. For central stenosis, these were "compromise of the central zone” and "relation between fluid and cauda equina”. For lateral stenosis, the group agreed that "nerve root compression in the lateral recess” was a core item. For foraminal stenosis, we included "nerve root impingement” and "compromise of the foraminal zone”. Conclusion: As a minimum standard, five radiological criteria should be used in a structured radiological report in LSS. Other parameters are well suited for research. Key Points : • The five most important radiological criteria for standard clinical reporting were selected • The five most important quantitative radiological parameters for research purposes were selected • These core criteria could help standardize the communication between health care provider

    Patient-Centered Outcomes Measurement: Does It Require Information From Patients?

    Full text link
    Purpose: Since collecting outcome measure data from patients can be expensive, time-consuming, and subject to memory and nonresponse bias, we sought to learn whether outcomes important to patients can be obtained from data in the electronic health record (EHR) or health insurance claims. Methods: We previously identified 21 outcomes rated important by patients who had advanced imaging tests for back or abdominal pain. Telephone surveys about experiencing those outcomes 1 year after their test from 321 people consenting to use of their medical record and claims data were compared with audits of the participants’ EHR progress notes over the time period between the imaging test and survey completion. We also compared survey data with algorithmically extracted data from claims files for outcomes for which data might be available from that source. Results: Of the 16 outcomes for which patients’ survey responses were considered to be the best information source, only 2 outcomes for back pain and 3 for abdominal pain had kappa scores above a very modest level of ≥ 0.2 for chart audit of EHR data and none for algorithmically obtained EHR/claims data. Of the other 5 outcomes for which claims data were considered to be the best information source, only 2 outcomes from patient surveys and 3 outcomes from chart audits had kappa scores ≥ 0.2. Conclusions: For the types of outcomes studied here, medical record or claims data do not provide an adequate source of information except for a few outcomes where patient reports may be less accurate

    Bias in the physical examination of patients with lumbar radiculopathy

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>No prior studies have examined systematic bias in the musculoskeletal physical examination. The objective of this study was to assess the effects of bias due to prior knowledge of lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging findings (MRI) on perceived diagnostic accuracy of the physical examination for lumbar radiculopathy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This was a cross-sectional comparison of the performance characteristics of the physical examination with blinding to MRI results (the 'independent group') with performance in the situation where the physical examination was not blinded to MRI results (the 'non-independent group'). The reference standard was the final diagnostic impression of nerve root impingement by the examining physician. Subjects were recruited from a hospital-based outpatient specialty spine clinic. All adults age 18 and older presenting with lower extremity radiating pain of duration ≤ 12 weeks were evaluated for participation. 154 consecutively recruited subjects with lumbar disk herniation confirmed by lumbar spine MRI were included in this study. Sensitivities and specificities with 95% confidence intervals were calculated in the independent and non-independent groups for the four components of the radiculopathy examination: 1) provocative testing, 2) motor strength testing, 3) pinprick sensory testing, and 4) deep tendon reflex testing.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The perceived sensitivity of sensory testing was higher with prior knowledge of MRI results (20% vs. 36%; p = 0.05). Sensitivities and specificities for exam components otherwise showed no statistically significant differences between groups.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Prior knowledge of lumbar MRI results may introduce bias into the pinprick sensory testing component of the physical examination for lumbar radiculopathy. No statistically significant effect of bias was seen for other components of the physical examination. The effect of bias due to prior knowledge of lumbar MRI results should be considered when an isolated sensory deficit on examination is used in medical decision-making. Further studies of bias should include surgical clinic populations and other common diagnoses including shoulder, knee and hip pathology.</p

    Associations Between Relative Value Units and Patient-Reported Back Pain and Disability

    Get PDF
    Objective: To describe associations between health care utilization measures and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Method: Primary data were collected from patients ≥65 years with low back pain visits from 2011 to 2013. Six PROs of pain and functionality were collected 12 and 24 months after the index visits and total and spine-specific relative value units (RVUs) from electronic health records were tabulated over 1 year. We calculated correlation coefficients between RVUs and 12- and 24-month PROs and conducted linear regressions with each 12- and 24-month PRO as the outcome variables and RVUs as predictors of interest. Results: We observed very weak correlations between worse PROs at 12 and 24 months and greater 12-month utilization. In regression analyses, we observed slight associations between greater utilization and worse 12- and 24-month PROs. Discussion: We found that 12-month health care utilization is not strongly associated with PROs at 12 or 24 months

    Association of early imaging for back pain with clinical outcomes in older adults

    Get PDF
    IMPORTANCE: In contrast to the recommendations for younger adults, many guidelines allow for older adults with back pain to undergo imaging without waiting 4 to 6 weeks. However, early imaging may precipitate interventions that do not improve outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To compare function and pain at the 12-month follow-up visit among older adults who received early imaging with those who did not receive early imaging after a new primary care visit for back pain without radiculopathy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective cohort of 5239 patients 65 years or older with a new primary care visit for back pain (2011-2013) in 3 US health care systems. We matched controls 1:1 using propensity score matching of demographic and clinical characteristics, including diagnosis, pain severity, pain duration, functional status, and prior resource use. EXPOSURES: Diagnostic imaging (plain films, computed tomography [CT], magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) of the lumbar or thoracic spine within 6 weeks of the index visit. PRIMARY OUTCOME: back or leg pain-related disability measured by the modified Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (score range, 0-24; higher scores indicate greater disability) 12 months after enrollment. RESULTS: Among the 5239 patients, 1174 had early radiographs and 349 had early MRI/CT. At 12 months, neither the early radiograph group nor the early MRI/CT group differed significantly from controls on the disability questionnaire. The mean score for patients who underwent early radiography was 8.54 vs 8.74 among the control group (difference, -0.10 [95% CI, -0.71 to 0.50]; mixed model, P = .36). The mean score for the early MRI/CT group was 9.81 vs 10.50 for the control group (difference,-0.51 [-1.62 to 0.60]; mixed model, P = .18). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among older adults with a new primary care visit for back pain, early imaging was not associated with better 1-year outcomes. The value of early diagnostic imaging in older adults for back pain without radiculopathy is uncertain

    Does lumbar spinal degeneration begin with the anterior structures? A study of the observed epidemiology in a community-based population

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background-</p> <p>Prior studies that have concluded that disk degeneration uniformly precedes facet degeneration have been based on convenience samples of individuals with low back pain. We conducted a study to examine whether the view that spinal degeneration begins with the anterior spinal structures is supported by epidemiologic observations of degeneration in a community-based population.</p> <p>Methods-</p> <p>361 participants from the Framingham Heart Study were included in this study. The prevalences of anterior vertebral structure degeneration (disk height loss) and posterior vertebral structure degeneration (facet joint osteoarthritis) were characterized by CT imaging. The cohort was divided into the structural subgroups of participants with 1) no degeneration, 2) isolated anterior degeneration (without posterior degeneration), 3) combined anterior and posterior degeneration, and 4) isolated posterior degeneration (without anterior structure degeneration). We determined the prevalence of each degeneration pattern by age group < 45, 45-54, 55-64, ≥65. In multivariate analyses we examined the association between disk height loss and the response variable of facet joint osteoarthritis, while adjusting for age, sex, BMI, and smoking.</p> <p>Results-</p> <p>As the prevalence of the no degeneration and isolated anterior degeneration patterns decreased with increasing age group, the prevalence of the combined anterior/posterior degeneration pattern increased. 22% of individuals demonstrated isolated posterior degeneration, without an increase in prevalence by age group. Isolated posterior degeneration was most common at the L5-S1 and L4-L5 spinal levels. In multivariate analyses, disk height loss was independently associated with facet joint osteoarthritis, as were increased age (years), female sex, and increased BMI (kg/m<sup>2</sup>), but not smoking.</p> <p>Conclusions-</p> <p>The observed epidemiology of lumbar spinal degeneration in the community-based population is consistent with an ordered progression beginning in the anterior structures, for the majority of individuals. However, some individuals demonstrate atypical patterns of degeneration, beginning in the posterior joints. Increased age and BMI, and female sex may be related to the occurrence of isolated posterior degeneration in these individuals.</p
    corecore