The use of routine spinal X-rays within chiropractic has a contentious history. Elements of the profession advocate for the need for routine spinal X-rays to improve patient management, whereas other chiropractors advocate using spinal X-rays only when endorsed by current imaging guidelines. This review aims to summarise the current evidence for the use of spinal X-ray in chiropractic practice, with consideration of the related risks and benefits. Current evidence supports the use of spinal X-rays only in the diagnosis of trauma and spondyloarthropathy, and in the assessment of progressive spinal structural deformities such as adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. MRI is indicated to diagnose serious pathology such as cancer or infection, and to assess the need for surgical management in radiculopathy and spinal stenosis. Strong evidence demonstrates risks of imaging such as excessive radiation exposure, overdiagnosis, subsequent low-value investigation and treatment procedures, and increased costs. In most cases the potential benefits from routine imaging, including spinal X-rays, do not outweigh the potential harms. The use of spinal X-rays should not be routinely performed in chiropractic practice, and should be guided by clinical guidelines and clinician judgement.

No abstract

word count: 304 Manuscript word count: 3392 2 ABSTRACT Objectives: To (i) estimate the proportion of patients seeking care for low back pain (LBP) who are imaged, and (ii) explore trends in the proportion of patients who received diagnostic imaging over time. We also examined the effect of study-level factors on estimates of imaging proportion. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Observational designs and controlled trials that reported imaging for patients presenting to primary care or emergency care for LBP. We assessed study quality and calculated pooled proportions by care setting and imaging type, with strength of evidence assessed using the GRADE system. Results: 45 studies were included. They represented 19,451,749 consultations for low back pain that had resulted in 4,343,919 imaging requests/events over 21 years. Primary care: moderate quality evidence that simple imaging proportion was 16.3% (95%CI 12.6 to 21.1) and complex imaging was 9.2% (95%CI 6.2 to 13.5). For any imaging the pooled proportion was 24.8% (95%CI 19.3 to 31.1). Emergency care: moderate quality evidence that simple imaging proportion was 26.1% (95%CI 18.2 to 35.8) and high quality evidence that complex imaging proportion was 8.2% (95%CI 4.4 to 15.6). For any imaging the pooled proportion was 35.6 % (95%CI 29.8 to 41.8). Complex imaging increased from 7.4% (95%CI 5.7 to 9.6) forimaging requested in 1995, to 11.4% (95%CI 9.6 to 13.5) in 2015 (relative increase of 53.5%).Between-study variability in imaging proportions was only partially explained by study-level characteristics; there were insufficient data to comment on some pre-specified study-level factors.Summary/conclusion: One in 4 patients who presented to primary care with low back pain received imaging as did one in 3 who presented to the Emergency department. The rate of

No abstract