The Spine Journal
Volume 10, Issue 6 , Pages 514-529, June 2010

Synthesis of recommendations for the assessment and management of low back pain from recent clinical practice guidelines

  • Simon Dagenais, DC, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Palladian Health, 2732 Transit Rd, West Seneca, NY 14224, USA
    • Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY 14260, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Palladian Health, 2732 Transit Rd, West Seneca, NY 14224, USA. Tel.: (949) 466-8132.
  • ,
  • Andrea C. Tricco, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Palladian Health, 2732 Transit Rd, West Seneca, NY 14224, USA
  • ,
  • Scott Haldeman, DC, MD, PhD

      Affiliations

    • Palladian Health, 2732 Transit Rd, West Seneca, NY 14224, USA
    • Department of Neurology, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697, USA
    • Department of Epidemiology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
    • Research Division, Southern California University of Health Sciences, Whittier, CA 90604, USA

Received 4 November 2009; received in revised form 24 February 2010; accepted 29 March 2010.

Abstract 

Background Context

Low back pain (LBP) is a prevalent, costly, and challenging condition to manage. Clinicians must choose among numerous assessment and management options. Several recent clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on LBP have attempted to inform these decisions by evaluating and summarizing the best available supporting evidence. The quality and consistency of recommendations from these CPGs are currently unknown.

Purpose

To conduct a systematic review of recent CPGs and synthesize their recommendations on assessing and managing LBP for clinicians.

Study Design/Setting

Systematic review.

Methods

Literature search using MEDLINE, National Guidelines Clearinghouse, National Institute for Clinical Excellence, Internet search engines, and references of known articles. Only CPGs related to both assessment and management of LBP written in English were eligible; CPGs that summarized evidence from before the year 2000 were excluded. Data related to methods and recommendations for assessment and management of LBP were abstracted independently by two reviewers. Methodological quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines Research and Evaluation (AGREE) instrument by two reviewers.

Results

The search uncovered 669 citations, of which 95 were potentially relevant and 10 were included in the review; 6 discussed acute LBP, 6 chronic LBP, and 6 LBP with neurologic involvement. Methods used to develop CPGs varied, but the overall methodological quality was high as defined by AGREE scores. Recommendations for assessment of LBP emphasized the importance of ruling out potentially serious spinal pathology, specific causes of LBP, and neurologic involvement, as well as identifying risk factors for chronicity and measuring the severity of symptoms and functional limitations, through the history, physical, and neurologic examination. Recommendations for management of acute LBP emphasized patient education, with short-term use of acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, or spinal manipulation therapy. For chronic LBP, the addition of back exercises, behavioral therapy, and short-term opioid analgesics was suggested. Management of LBP with neurologic involvement was similar, with additional consideration given to magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography to identify appropriate candidates willing to undergo epidural steroid injections or decompression surgery if more conservative approaches are not successful.

Conclusions

Recommendations from several recent CPGs regarding the assessment and management of LBP were similar. Clinicians who care for patients with LBP should endeavor to adopt these recommendations to improve patient care. Future CPGs may wish to invite coauthors from targeted clinician user groups, increase patient participation, update their literature searches before publication, conduct their own quality assessment of studies, and consider cost-effectiveness and other aspects in their recommendations more explicitly.

Keywords: Low back pain, Clinical practice guidelines, Systematic review, Evidence-based medicine

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 FDA device/drug status: not applicable.

 Author disclosures: SD (salary, Palladian Health; stock ownership, including options and warrants, Palladian Health; training grant, NCMIC Foundation; speaking and/or teaching arrangements, NCMIC Foundation); ACT (consulting, Palladian Health; research support: investigator salary, Palladian Health); SH (royalties, multiple publishing companies; stock ownership, including options and warrants, Palladian Health; consulting, Palladian Health, NCMIC Foundation, University of New York; speaking and/or teaching arrangements, multiple organizations; trips/travel, multiple meetings per prior field; scientific advisory board, NYCC; other office, WFC Research Council).

 The authors are consultants, employees, or officers of Palladian Health, LLC, a company that manages specialty health benefits on behalf of other health insurers.

PII: S1529-9430(10)00288-3

doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2010.03.032

The Spine Journal
Volume 10, Issue 6 , Pages 514-529, June 2010