Literature DB >> 27496288

ACR Appropriateness Criteria Low Back Pain.

Nandini D Patel1, Daniel F Broderick2, Judah Burns3, Tejaswini K Deshmukh4, Ian Blair Fries5, H Benjamin Harvey6, Langston Holly7, Christopher H Hunt8, Bharathi D Jagadeesan9, Tabassum A Kennedy10, John E O'Toole11, Joel S Perlmutter12, Bruno Policeni13, Joshua M Rosenow14, Jason W Schroeder15, Matthew T Whitehead16, Rebecca S Cornelius17, Amanda S Corey18.   

Abstract

Most patients presenting with uncomplicated acute low back pain (LBP) and/or radiculopathy do not require imaging. Imaging is considered in those patients who have had up to 6 weeks of medical management and physical therapy that resulted in little or no improvement in their back pain. It is also considered for those patients presenting with red flags raising suspicion for serious underlying conditions, such as cauda equina syndrome, malignancy, fracture, and infection. Many imaging modalities are available to clinicians and radiologists for evaluating LBP. Application of these modalities depends largely on the working diagnosis, the urgency of the clinical problem, and comorbidities of the patient. When there is concern for fracture of the lumbar spine, multidetector CT is recommended. Those deemed to be interventional candidates, with LBP lasting for > 6 weeks having completed conservative management with persistent radiculopathic symptoms, may seek MRI. Patients with severe or progressive neurologic deficit on presentation and red flags should be evaluated with MRI. The ACR Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer-reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances in which evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.
Copyright © 2016 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Appropriateness Criteria; low back pain; radiculopathy; red flags

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27496288     DOI: 10.1016/j.jacr.2016.06.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Radiol        ISSN: 1546-1440            Impact factor:   5.532


  42 in total

Review 1.  The role of radiography in the study of spinal disorders.

Authors:  Fernando Ruiz Santiago; Antonio Jesús Láinez Ramos-Bossini; Yì Xiáng J Wáng; Daniel López Zúñiga
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2020-12

2.  The role of bone SPECT/CT in patients with persistent or recurrent lumbar pain following lumbar spine stabilization surgery.

Authors:  Khulood Al-Riyami; Stefan Vöö; Gopinath Gnanasegaran; Ian Pressney; Adam Meir; Adrian Casey; Sean Molloy; James Allibone; Jamshed Bomanji
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2018-09-06       Impact factor: 9.236

3.  Global and Japanese regional variations in radiologist potential workload for computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging examinations.

Authors:  Kanako K Kumamaru; Akihiro Machitori; Ritsuko Koba; Shinpei Ijichi; Yasuo Nakajima; Shigeki Aoki
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2018-02-16       Impact factor: 2.374

4.  Appropriate imaging utilization in Japan: a survey of accredited radiology training hospitals.

Authors:  Kanako K Kumamaru; Sadayuki Murayama; Yasuyuki Yamashita; Takeshi Nojo; Yoshiyuki Watanabe; Mariko Goto; Eriko Maeda; Junko Echigo; Shigeyoshi Soga; Shinya Fujii; Yutaka Tanami; Tetsuhiko Okabe; Masahiro Okada; Jiro Munechika; Hideki Ota; Mototaka Miyake; Hiroshi Honda; Shigeki Aoki
Journal:  Jpn J Radiol       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 2.374

5.  The Global Spine Care Initiative: a systematic review for the assessment of spine-related complaints in populations with limited resources and in low- and middle-income communities.

Authors:  Margareta Nordin; Kristi Randhawa; Paola Torres; Hainan Yu; Scott Haldeman; O'Dane Brady; Pierre Côté; Carlos Torres; Michael Modic; Rajani Mullerpatan; Christine Cedraschi; Roger Chou; Emre Acaroğlu; Eric L Hurwitz; Nadège Lemeunier; Jean Dudler; Anne Taylor-Vaisey; Erkin Sönmez
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Diagnostic accuracy of low-dose versus ultra-low-dose CT for lumbar disc disease and facet joint osteoarthritis in patients with low back pain with MRI correlation.

Authors:  Sun Hwa Lee; Seong Jong Yun; Hyeon Hwan Jo; Dong Hyeon Kim; Jae Gwang Song; Yong Sung Park
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 2.199

7.  Lumbar spine evaluation: accuracy on abdominal CT.

Authors:  Mitchell A Klein
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2017-08-22       Impact factor: 3.039

8.  Radiologist involvement is associated with reduced use of MRI in the acute period of low back pain in a non-elderly population.

Authors:  Kanako K Kumamaru; Yukiko Sano; Hiraku Kumamaru; Masaaki Hori; Tomohiro Takamura; Ryusuke Irie; Michimasa Suzuki; Akifumi Hagiwara; Koji Kamagata; Atsushi Nakanishi; Shigeki Aoki
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2017-10-23       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 9.  Bone SPECT/CT in the postoperative spine: a focus on spinal fusion.

Authors:  Khulood Al-Riyami; Gopinath Gnanasegaran; Tim Van den Wyngaert; Jamshed Bomanji
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2017-07-05       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 10.  Pain States, the Opioid Epidemic, and the Role of Radiologists.

Authors:  Mark R Jones; Alan D Kaye; Laxmaiah Manchikanti; Joshua A Hirsch
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2018-02-23
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.