A prospective study of patients with low back pain attending a Canadian emergency department: Why they came and what happened?

Low back pain is a common presentation to emergency departments, but the reasons why people choose to attend the emergency department have not been explored. We aimed to fill this gap with this study to understand why persons with low back pain choose to attend the emergency department. Between July 4, 2017 and October 1, 2018, consecutive patients with a complaint of low back pain presenting to the University of Alberta Hospital emergency department were screened. Those enrolled completed a 13-item questionnaire to assess reasons and expectations related to their presentation. Demographics, acuity and disposition were obtained electronically. Factors associated with admission were examined in a logistic regression model. After screening 812 patients, 209 participants met the study criteria. The most common Canadian Triage and Acuity Scale score was 3 (73.2%). Overall, 37 (17.7%) received at least one consultation, 89.0% of participants were discharged home, 9.6% were admitted and 1.4% were transferred. Participants had a median pain intensity of 8/10 and a median daily functioning of 3/10. When asked, 64.6% attended for pain control while 44.5% stated ease of access. Most participants expected to obtain pain medication (67%) and advice (56%). Few attended because of cost savings (3.8%). After adjustment, only advanced age and ambulance arrival were significantly associated with admission. In conclusion, most low back pain patients came to the emergency department for pain control yet few were admitted and the majority did not receive a consultation. Timely alternatives for management of low back pain in the emergency department appear needed, yet are lacking.

X-ray vision: the accuracy and repeatability of a technology that allows clinicians to see spinal X-rays superimposed on a person's back.

OBJECTIVE: Since the discovery of ionizing radiation, clinicians have evaluated X-ray images separately from the patient. The objective of this study was to investigate the accuracy and repeatability of a new technology which seeks to resolve this historic limitation by projecting anatomically correct X-ray images on to a person's skin. METHODS: A total of 13 participants enrolled in the study, each having a pre-existing anteroposterior lumbar X-ray. Each participant's image was uploaded into the Hololens Mixed reality system which when worn, allowed a single examiner to view a participant's own X-ray superimposed on the participant's back. The projected image was topographically corrected using depth information obtained by the Hololens system then aligned via existing anatomic landmarks. Using this superimposed image, vertebral levels were identified and validated against spinous process locations obtained by ultrasound. This process was repeated 1-5 days later. The projection of each vertebra was deemed to be "on-target" if it fell within the known morphological dimensions of the spinous process for that specific vertebral level. RESULTS: The projection system created on-target projections with respect to individual vertebral levels 73% of the time with no significant difference seen between testing sessions. The average repeatability for all vertebral levels between testing sessions was 77%. CONCLUSION: These accuracy and repeatability data suggest that the accuracy and repeatability of projecting X-rays directly on to the skin is feasible for identifying underlying anatomy and as such, has potential to place radiological evaluation within the patient context. Future opportunities to improve this procedure will focus on mitigating potential sources of error.