Are general practitioners referring patients with low back pain for CTs appropriately according to the guidelines: a retrospective review of 3609 medical records in Newfoundland using routinely collected data

• Published in: BMC Family Practice
• Main Authors: Logan, Gabrielle S., Dawe, Russell Eric, Aubrey-Bassler, Kris, Coombs, Danielle, Parfrey, Patrick, Maher, Chris, Etchegary, Holly, Hall, Amanda
• Other Authors: Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland
• Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
• Language: English
• Published: Springer Science and Business Media LLC 2020
• Subjects: Family Practice; Canada; Newfoundland
• Online Access: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12875-020-01308-5; http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1186/s12875-020-01308-5.pdf; http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s12875-020-01308-5/fulltext.html

Abstract Background CT Imaging is often requested for patients with low back pain (LBP) by their general practitioners. It is currently unknown what reasons are common for these referrals and if CT images are ordered according to guidelines in one province in Canada, which has high rates of CT imaging. The objective of this study is to categorise lumbar spine CT referrals into serious spinal pathology, radicular syndrome, and non-specific LBP and evaluate the appropriateness of CT imaging referrals from general practitioners for patients with LBP. Methods A retrospective medical record review of electronic health records was performed in one health region in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada. Inclusion criteria were lumbar spine CT referrals ordered by general practitioners for adults ≥18 years, and performed between January 1st-December 31st, 2016. Each CT referral was identified from linked databases (Meditech and PACS). To the study authors’ knowledge, guidelines regarding when to refer patients with low back pain for CT imaging had not been actively disseminated to general practitioners or implemented at clinics/hospitals during this time period. Data were manually extracted and categorised into three groups: red flag conditions (judged to be an appropriate referral), radicular syndrome (judged be unclear appropriateness), or nonspecific LBP (determined to be inappropriate). Results Three thousand six hundred nine lumbar spine CTs were included from 2016. The mean age of participants was 54.7 (SD 14 years), with females comprising 54.6% of referrals. 1.9% of lumbar CT referrals were missing/unclear, 6.5% of CTs were ordered on a red-flag suspicion, 75.6% for radicular syndromes, and 16.0% for non-specific LBP; only 6.5% of referrals were clearly appropriate. Key information including patient history and clinical exams performed at appointment were often missing from referrals. Conclusion This audit found high proportions of inappropriate or questionable referrals for lumbar spine CT and many were missing information needed to categorise. Further research to understand the drivers of inappropriate imaging and cost to the healthcare system would be beneficial.