ArticleInternational orthopaedics2018
Specific spinal pathologies in adult patients with an acute or subacute atraumatic low back pain in the emergency department.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnostic Utility of Red Flags for Detecting Spinal Malignancies in Patients with Low Back Pain: A Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Red flags to screen for vertebral fracture in people presenting with low back pain.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Review
- Characteristics and clinical features of cauda equina syndrome: insights from a study on 256 patients.SICOT-J · 2023Article
- Demographics of Cauda Equina Syndrome: A Population-Based Incidence Study.Neuroepidemiology · 2022Article
- Implementation of musculoskeletal specialists in the emergency department at a level A1 VA Hospital during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.The American journal of emergency medicine · 2021Article
- Role of C-reactive protein in effective utilization of emergent MRI for spinal infections.Emergency radiology · 2021Article
- Orthopedic Professionals' Recognition and Knowledge of Pain and Perceived Barriers to Optimal Pain Management at Five Hospitals.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe primary aim in the evaluation of patients presenting with acute or subacute low back pain (LBP) is to exclude a possible specific spinal pathology. Literature on the population-based incidences of these pathologies is scarce. The aim of our study was to investigate the population-based incidence of specific spinal pathologies as a cause of atraumatic acute or subacute LBP.
methodsFrom our institutional database, we identified all patients with a relevant LBP-related ICD-10 code during a visit to our emergency department (ED) in a level II/III teaching hospital between January 2012 and December 2014. Patients with a possible specific spinal pathology (cauda equina syndrome, spondylodiscitis, vertebral fracture, and cancer) were assessed in detail.
resultsA total of 900 visits were due to atraumatic low back pain. Of these 284 (31.6%) were due to nonspecific LBP, and 583 (64.8%) due to radicular pain suggesting nerve root compression. In 33 (3.7%) cases, the LBP was caused by a specific spinal pathology. The annual incidences per 100,000 were 0.60 for CES, 2.1 for spondylodiscitis, 0.76 for cancer and 1.2 for compression fracture.
conclusionsThe incidences of specific spinal pathologies were low. Given that LBP is a very common symptom, it is not surprising that the accuracy of red flag symptoms is poor. Each patient should be considered individually, and we advocate a low threshold for referral and advanced imaging in cases where a specific spinal pathology is suspected.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.