Trial reportPain medicine (Malden, Mass.)2021
Providing Epidemiological Data in Lumbar Spine Imaging Reports Did Not Affect Subsequent Utilization of Spine Procedures: Secondary Outcomes from a Stepped-Wedge Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Pain medicine (Malden, Mass.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Characteristics and Effectiveness of Interventions That Target the Reporting, Communication, or Clinical Interpretation of Lumbar Imaging Findings: A Systematic Review.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2022Pooled it
- Article
- Modic changes as seen on MRI are associated with nonspecific chronic lower back pain and disability.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Review
- Unintended consequences: quantifying the benefits, iatrogenic harms and downstream cascade costs of musculoskeletal MRI in UK primary care.BMJ open quality · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo evaluate the effect of inserting epidemiological information into lumbar spine imaging reports on subsequent nonsurgical and surgical procedures involving the thoracolumbosacral spine and sacroiliac joints.
designAnalysis of secondary outcomes from the Lumbar Imaging with Reporting of Epidemiology (LIRE) pragmatic stepped-wedge randomized trial.
settingPrimary care clinics within four integrated health care systems in the United States. SUBJECTS: 238,886 patients ≥18 years of age who received lumbar diagnostic imaging between 2013 and 2016.
methodsClinics were randomized to receive text containing age- and modality-specific epidemiological benchmarks indicating the prevalence of common spine imaging findings in people without low back pain, inserted into lumbar spine imaging reports (the "LIRE intervention"). The study outcomes were receiving 1) any nonsurgical lumbosacral or sacroiliac spine procedure (lumbosacral epidural steroid injection, facet joint injection, or facet joint radiofrequency ablation; or sacroiliac joint injection) or 2) any surgical procedure involving the lumbar, sacral, or thoracic spine (decompression surgery or spinal fusion or other spine surgery).
resultsThe LIRE intervention was not significantly associated with subsequent utilization of nonsurgical lumbosacral or sacroiliac spine procedures (odds ratio [OR] = 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-1.09; P = 0.79) or any surgical procedure (OR = 0.99, 95 CI 0.91-1.07; P = 0.74) involving the lumbar, sacral, or thoracic spine. The intervention was also not significantly associated with any individual spine procedure.
conclusionsInserting epidemiological text into spine imaging reports had no effect on nonsurgical or surgical procedure utilization among patients receiving lumbar diagnostic imaging.
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.