Analyzing Unnecessary Imaging for Low Back Pain in Nebraska from a Statewide Health Information Exchange

Doll, Joy; Kreikemeier, Madison; Maddigan, Cassie; Marshall, Nathaniel; Young, Maggie

doi:10.1007/s10916-022-01838-8

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Eighteen studies ( n = 18) reported that patient characteristics influence imaging CDM (Barnett et al., 2020; Bouck et al., 2019; Doll et al., 2022; Ely et al., 2018; Ferreira et al., 2019; Friedman et al., 2010; Gidwani et al., 2016; Graves et al., 2012; Hong et al., 2017; Kohns et al., 2018; McCaughey et al., 2016; Pakpoor et al., 2020; Peurois et al., 2022; Schlemmer et al., 2015; Tan et al., 2016; Traeger et al., 2021; Urrutia et al., 2020; Zargar et al., 2014). Patient characteristics were divided into five subcategories: age ( n = 14; 78%), sex ( n = 7; 39%), ethnicity ( n = 5; 28%), socioeconomic factors ( n = 8; 44%), and clinical history ( n = 8; 44%) (Table 3).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Factors influencing imaging clinical decision‐making in low back pain management. A scoping review

Tanner,

Saywell,

Adams

et al. 2024

Musculoskeletal Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe use of diagnostic imaging in low back pain (LBP) management is often inappropriate, despite recommendations from clinical practice guidelines. There is a limited understanding of factors that influence the imaging clinical decision‐making (CDM) process.AimExplore the literature on factors influencing imaging CDM for people with LBP and consider how these findings could be used to reduce inappropriate use of imaging in LBP management.DesignScoping review.MethodThis review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review extension for scoping reviews. A digital search was conducted in Medline, the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for eligible studies published between January 2010–2023. Data reporting influences on imaging CDM were extracted. Data were then analysed through an inductive process to group the influencing factors into categories.ResultsAfter screening, 35 studies (5 qualitative and 30 quantitative) were included in the review, which reported factors influencing imaging CDM. Three categories were developed: clinical features (such as red flags, pain, and neurological deficit), non‐modifiable factors (such as age, sex, and ethnicity) and modifiable factors (such as beliefs about consequences and clinical practice). Most studies reported non‐modifiable factors.ConclusionsThe results of this scoping review challenge the perception that imaging CDM is purely based on clinical history and objective findings. There is a complex interplay between clinical features, patient and clinician characteristics, beliefs, and environment. These findings should be considered when designing strategies to address inappropriate imaging behaviour.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Eighteen studies (n = 18) reported that patient characteristics influence imaging CDM (Barnett et al, 2020;Bouck et al, 2019;Doll et al, 2022;Ely et al, 2018;Ferreira et al, 2019;Friedman et al, 2010;Gidwani et al, 2016;Graves et al, 2012; Hong socioeconomic factors (n = 8; 44%), and clinical history (n = 8; 44%) (Table 3).…”

Section: Non-modifiable Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%