Prevalence of and screening for serious spinal pathology in patients presenting to primary care settings with acute low back pain
- PMID: 19790051
- DOI: 10.1002/art.24853
Prevalence of and screening for serious spinal pathology in patients presenting to primary care settings with acute low back pain
Abstract
Objective: To determine the prevalence of serious pathology in patients presenting to primary care settings with acute low back pain, and to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of recommended "red flag" screening questions.
Methods: An inception cohort of 1,172 consecutive patients receiving primary care for acute low back pain was recruited from primary care clinics in Sydney, Australia. At the initial consultation, clinicians recorded responses to 25 red flag questions and then provided an initial diagnosis. The reference standard was a 12-month followup supplemented with a specialist review of a random subsample of participants.
Results: There were 11 cases (0.9%) of serious pathology, including 8 cases of fracture. Despite the low prevalence of serious pathology, most patients (80.4%) had at least 1 red flag (median 2, interquartile range 1-3). Only 3 of the red flags for fracture recommended for use in clinical guidelines were informative: prolonged use of corticosteroids, age >70 years, and significant trauma. Clinicians identified 5 of the 11 cases of serious pathology at the initial consultation and made 6 false-positive diagnoses. The status of a diagnostic prediction rule containing 4 features (female sex, age >70 years, significant trauma, and prolonged use of corticosteroids) was moderately associated with the presence of fracture (the area under the curve for the rule score was 0.834 [95% confidence interval 0.654-1.014]; P = 0.001).
Conclusion: In patients presenting to a primary care provider with back pain, previously undiagnosed serious pathology is rare. The most common serious pathology observed was vertebral fracture. Approximately half of the cases of serious pathology were identified at the initial consultation. Some red flags have very high false-positive rates, indicating that, when used in isolation, they have little diagnostic value in the primary care setting.
Comment in
-
Diagnosing acute nonspecific low back pain: time to lower the red flags?Arthritis Rheum. 2009 Oct;60(10):2855-7. doi: 10.1002/art.24858. Arthritis Rheum. 2009. PMID: 19790072 No abstract available.
-
Prospective cohort study: Serious pathology in people presenting to primary care with acute low back pain is rare (0.9%), but high false-positive rates for some 'red flags' may limit their diagnostic value.Evid Based Med. 2010 Apr;15(2):61-2. doi: 10.1136/ebm1040. Evid Based Med. 2010. PMID: 20436132 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Diagnosing acute nonspecific low back pain: time to lower the red flags?Arthritis Rheum. 2009 Oct;60(10):2855-7. doi: 10.1002/art.24858. Arthritis Rheum. 2009. PMID: 19790072 No abstract available.
-
Red flags to screen for vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 Aug 24;8(8):CD014461. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD014461.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023. PMID: 37615643 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Characteristics of patients with acute low back pain presenting to primary care in Australia.Clin J Pain. 2009 Jan;25(1):5-11. doi: 10.1097/AJP.0b013e3181817a8d. Clin J Pain. 2009. PMID: 19158540
-
Red Flags for Low Back Pain Are Not Always Really Red: A Prospective Evaluation of the Clinical Utility of Commonly Used Screening Questions for Low Back Pain.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018 Mar 7;100(5):368-374. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.17.00134. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2018. PMID: 29509613
-
Clinical decision rules for identification of low back pain patients with neurologic involvement in primary care.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008 Jan 1;33(1):68-73. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815e3949. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008. PMID: 18165751 Review.
Cited by
-
Usability and Acceptability of an App (SELFBACK) to Support Self-Management of Low Back Pain: Mixed Methods Study.JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2020 Sep 9;7(2):e18729. doi: 10.2196/18729. JMIR Rehabil Assist Technol. 2020. PMID: 32902393 Free PMC article.
-
Management of low back pain and lumbosacral radicular syndrome: the Guideline of the Royal Dutch Society for Physical Therapy (KNGF).Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2024 Apr;60(2):292-318. doi: 10.23736/S1973-9087.24.08352-7. Epub 2024 Feb 26. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2024. PMID: 38407016 Free PMC article.
-
Patient adherence to physical activity advice (PAPA) in patients with low back pain: Study protocol for a multicentre randomized controlled trial.Physiother Res Int. 2022 Oct;27(4):e1969. doi: 10.1002/pri.1969. Epub 2022 Aug 17. Physiother Res Int. 2022. PMID: 35975659 Free PMC article.
-
Efficacy of Tuina in patients with chronic low back pain: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.Trials. 2020 Mar 17;21(1):271. doi: 10.1186/s13063-020-4198-2. Trials. 2020. PMID: 32178704 Free PMC article.
-
Diagnostic accuracy: sensitivity and specificity of the ScreenAssist Lumbar Questionnaire in comparison with primary care provider tests and measures of low back pain: a pilot study.J Man Manip Ther. 2013 Feb;21(1):48-59. doi: 10.1179/2042618612Y.0000000012. J Man Manip Ther. 2013. PMID: 24421613 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources