Behavioural 'nudging' interventions to reduce low-value care for low back pain in the emergency department (NUDG-ED): protocol for a 2×2 factorial, before-after, cluster randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: Opioids and imaging are considered low-value care for most people with low back pain. Yet around one in three people presenting to the emergency department (ED) will receive imaging, and two in three will receive an opioid. NUDG-ED aims to determine the effectiveness of two different behavioural 'nudge' interventions on low-value care for ED patients with low back pain. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: NUDG-ED is a 2×2 factorial, open-label, before-after, cluster randomised controlled trial. The trial includes 8 ED sites in Sydney, Australia. Participants will be ED clinicians who manage back pain, and patients who are 18 years or over presenting to ED with musculoskeletal back pain. EDs will be randomly assigned to receive (i) patient nudges, (ii) clinician nudges, (iii) both interventions or (iv) no nudge control. The primary outcome will be the proportion of encounters in ED for musculoskeletal back pain where a person received a non-indicated lumbar imaging test, an opioid at discharge or both. We will require 2416 encounters over a 9-month study period (3-month before period and 6-month after period) to detect an absolute difference of 10% in use of low-value care due to either nudge, with 80% power, alpha set at 0.05 and assuming an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.10, and an intraperiod correlation of 0.09. Patient-reported outcome measures will be collected in a subsample of patients (n≥456) 1 week after their initial ED visit. To estimate effects, we will use a multilevel regression model, with a random effect for cluster and patient, a fixed effect indicating the group assignment of each cluster and a fixed effect of time. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has ethical approval from Southwestern Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee (2023/ETH00472). We will disseminate the results of this trial via media, presenting at conferences and scientific publications. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12623001000695.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on new parents enrolled in the 'BABY1000' birth cohort study in Sydney, Australia: A mixed-methods study.

OBJECTIVE: The COVID-19 pandemic was, and continues to be, uniquely experienced by women in the perinatal period and their families. Whilst long-term impacts of the pandemic are unknown, exposures in pregnancy and early life have impacts across the life-course and future generations. The objective of this manuscript was to explore how the pregnancy, postpartum and parenting experiences of a subset of participants from the 'BABY1000' cohort in Sydney, Australia, were affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, and explore associations between these experiences and state anxiety. METHODS: Mixed methods were used. Participants were requested to complete an online survey including the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory short form (STAI-6), followed by an invitation to participate in focus group discussions (FGDs). RESULTS: From September to November 2021, 88 parents completed the survey (mean age 33.5 years, 60% born in Australia, 58% primiparous). Twenty-two parents participated in FGDs. Six themes were identified regarding the experience of parents: (1) Maternal support, (2) Family relationships, (3) Stress and mental health, (4) Healthcare, (5) Family lifestyle and routine, and (6) Long-term impacts. The mean STAI-6 score was 40 (SD 12.3), representing high anxiety. High anxiety was significantly associated with concern regarding COVID-19 and feeling overburdened and lonely. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic and associated public health orders significantly impacted participants' pregnancy, postpartum and parenting experiences. Whilst these experiences included some unexpected positives, for many, these were outweighed by negative impacts on mental health, social support, health behaviours, and family relationships. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Ongoing longitudinal research is imperative to identify potential long-term effects of the pandemic across the life-course, better support families in the short and long-term, and plan for public health crises in the future.

Low back pain of disc, sacroiliac joint, or facet joint origin: a diagnostic accuracy systematic review.

Background: The accuracy of diagnostic tests available in primary care to identify the disc, sacroiliac joint, and facet joint as the source of low back pain is uncertain. Methods: Systematic review of diagnostic tests available in primary care. MEDLINE, CINAHL, and EMBASE were searched between March 2006 and 25th January 2023. Pairs of reviewers independently screened all studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias using QUADAS-2. Pooling was performed for homogenous studies. Positive likelihood ratios (+LR) ≥2 and negative likelihood ratios (-LR) ≤0.5 were considered informative. This review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020169828). Findings: We included 62 studies: 35 investigated the disc, 14 the facet joint, 11 the sacroiliac joint, and 2 investigated all three structures in patients with persistent low back pain. For risk of bias, the domain 'reference standard' scored worst, however approximately half the studies were of low risk of bias for every other domain. For the disc, pooling demonstrated MRI findings of disc degeneration and annular fissure resulted in informative +LRs: 2.53 (95% CI: 1.57-4.07) and 2.88 (95% CI: 2.02-4.10) and -LRs: 0.15 (95% CI: 0.09-0.24) and 0.24 (95% CI: 0.10-0.55) respectively. Pooled results for Modic type 1, Modic type 2, and HIZ on MRI, and centralisation phenomenon yielded informative +LRs: 10.00 (95% CI: 4.20-23.82), 8.03 (95% CI: 3.23-19.97), 3.10 (95% CI: 2.27-4.25), and 3.06 (95% CI: 1.44-6.50) respectively, but uninformative -LRs: 0.84 (95% CI: 0.74-0.96), 0.88 (95% CI: 0.80-0.96), 0.61 (95% CI: 0.48-0.77), and 0.66 (95% CI: 0.52-0.84) respectively. For the facet joint, pooling demonstrated facet joint uptake on SPECT resulted in informative +LRs: 2.80 (95% CI: 1.82-4.31) and -LRs: 0.44 (95% CI: 0.25-0.77). For the sacroiliac joint, a combination of pain provocation tests and absence of midline low back pain resulted in informative +LRs of 2.41 (95% CI: 1.89-3.07) and 2.44 (95% CI: 1.50-3.98) and -LRs of 0.35 (95% CI: 0.12-1.01) and 0.31 (95% CI: 0.21-0.47) respectively. Radionuclide imaging yielded an informative +LR 7.33 (95% CI: 1.42-37.80) but an uninformative -LR 0.74 (95% CI: 0.41-1.34). Interpretation: There are informative diagnostic tests for the disc, sacroiliac joint, and facet joint (only one test). The evidence suggests a diagnosis may be possible for some patients with low back pain, potentially guiding targeted and specific treatment approaches. Funding: There was no funding for this study.

Physical Activity Interventions for Adults Aged 60+ Years in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Most reviews investigating physical activity interventions for older people consider evidence primarily from high-income countries. This review examined physical activity interventions for older people from low- and middle-income countries. METHODS: We searched 9 electronic databases to identify randomized controlled trials or quasi-randomized trials studies investigating physical activity interventions for people aged 60+ in low- and middle-income countries. Following study selection, one reviewer extracted relevant data. A second reviewer double-checked the data extraction of a randomly selected sample of interventions (20%). Data were summarized using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: We included 234 studies from 19 countries, investigating 259 distinct physical activity interventions. Studies were mostly conducted in upper middle-income countries (89%), often assessing physical activity interventions through randomized controlled trials (82%). Most studies investigated a mixed population in terms of sex (68%), with a mean age between 65 and 70 years (36%), not selected on the basis of having a specific health condition (55%). The intervention most commonly investigated was structured exercise (63%) and "no intervention" was the most frequent comparator (47%). The outcomes measured more often were intrinsic capacity (59%) and functional ability (51%), whereas physical activity, falls, and social outcomes were rare. Only 2 studies targeted underserved populations. CONCLUSION: Although we identified a substantial number of randomized controlled trials, most evidence for physical activity interventions for older people in low- and middle-income countries is limited to upper middle-income countries. Gaps identified included interventions targeting populations with underserved backgrounds, using sport as an intervention, and assessing the impact of physical activity interventions on physical activity, falls, and social outcomes.

Impact of physical activity programs and services for older adults: a rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of which physical activity programs are most effective for older adults in different sub-populations and contexts is limited. The objectives of this rapid review were to: 1) Overview evidence evaluating physical activity programs/services for older adults; and 2) Describe impact on physical activity, falls, intrinsic capacity (physical domain), functional ability (physical, social, and cognitive/emotional domains), and quality of life. METHODS: We conducted a rapid review of primary studies from 350 systematic reviews identified in a previous scoping review (March 2021: PEDro, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Database). For Objective 1, we included intervention studies investigating physical activity programs/services in adults ≥ 60 years. Of these, we included good quality (≥ 6/10 PEDro scale) randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with ≥ 50 participants per group in Objective 2. RESULTS: Objective 1: Of the 1421 intervention studies identified from 8267 records, 79% were RCTs, 87% were in high income countries and 39% were good quality. Objective 2: We identified 87 large, good quality RCTs (26,861 participants). Overall activity promotion, structured exercise and recreation/sport had positive impacts (≥ 50% between-group comparisons positive) across all outcome domains. For overall activity promotion (21 intervention groups), greatest impacts were on physical activity (100% positive) and social outcomes (83% positive). Structured exercise (61 intervention groups) had particularly strong impacts on falls (91% positive), intrinsic capacity (67% positive) and physical functioning (77% positive). Recreation/sport (24 intervention groups) had particularly strong impacts on cognitive/emotional functioning (88% positive). Multicomponent exercise (39 intervention groups) had strong impacts across all outcomes, particularly physical activity (95% positive), falls (90% positive) and physical functioning (81% positive). Results for different populations and settings are presented. CONCLUSION: Evidence supporting physical activity for older adults is positive. We outline which activity types are most effective in different populations and settings.

Effect of COVID-19 on management of patients with low back pain in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Patients presenting to Emergency Department (ED) with non-specific low back pain can receive more unnecessary, intensive and costly care than is recommended. The COVID-19 pandemic has provided an unprecedented opportunity to examine how health systems prioritise necessary care that provides clear benefits to patients. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of COVID-19 on care of low back pain in the ED. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of electronic medical record data on care for low back pain from three public hospitals in Sydney. We included patients diagnosed with spinal conditions who presented between March and May in 2019 and in 2020. Outcomes were the total number of patients presenting with spinal conditions to ED, the proportion diagnosed with non-specific low back pain, and the proportion receiving potentially unnecessary aspects of care (ambulance use, imaging, opioids, hospital admissions). We calculated relative risk with 95% CIs and examined plots with locally weighted smoothed curves. RESULTS: Presentations for spinal conditions over a three-month period to three EDs reduced from 694 in 2019 to 475 in 2020 (31% reduction, 95% CI = 26%-37%). The proportion of patients diagnosed with non-specific low back pain (83% in 2019 vs 86% in 2020), or receiving potentially unnecessary care were similar in 2019 and 2020 (Imaging = 25% vs 25%; Opioids = 54% vs 56%; Admitted = 18% vs 20%; pathology test = 24% vs 23%). The proportion of patients arriving by ambulance was higher during the pandemic; 29% in 2019 vs 41% in 2020 (RR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.19-1.63). CONCLUSIONS: ED presentations for low back pain associated with spinal conditions decreased substantially during the COVID-19 pandemic. Use of potentially unnecessary aspects of care did not change or increased during the pandemic.

Prevalence and factors associated with joint pain in Nepal: findings from a countrywide cross-sectional STEPS survey.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to determine the prevalence of joint pain and its association with demographic, socioeconomic and behavioural factors in Nepal. DESIGN: The study was a national cross-sectional population-based study. SETTING: We used the most recent nationally representative population-based cross-sectional health survey, The WHO STEPwise approach to surveillance (STEPS) survey, 2019 from all seven provinces of Nepal including both urban and rural areas. PARTICIPANTS: The participants were men and women aged 15-69 years, who were usual residents of the households for at least 6 months and have stayed the night before the survey. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome in this study was prevalence of joint pain. The secondary outcome measure was factors associated with joint pain in Nepal. Joint pain in our study was based on any self-reported symptoms of joint pain, stiffness and swelling lasting for more than 1 month in the past 12 months. Data were weighted to generate national estimates. RESULTS: The prevalence of self-reported joint pain in Nepal was 17% (95% CI 14.3% to 20.2%) with higher prevalence for older adults, females, ever married, none/less than primary education, smoker, lowest wealth quintile, homemaker, those with sufficient physical activity and those living in the Karnali province of Nepal. In multivariable analysis self-reported joint pain was found to be associated with advanced age (adjusted OR (AOR)=2.36; 95% CI 1.56 to 3.55), sex (AOR=1.47; 95% CI 1.19 to 1.82) and sufficient physical activity (AOR=0.40; 95% CI 0.25 to 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: The results showed a high prevalence of joint pain in Nepal. Considering the process of ageing and rapid growth in non-communicable disease, this study warrants the need for health policies directed to prevention, treatment and rehabilitation for people affected by chronic musculoskeletal conditions addressing related disabilities and loss of work in Nepal.

Effect of a waiting room communication strategy on imaging rates and awareness of public health messages for low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have investigated the effects of waiting room communication strategies on health-care behavior. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the effect of a waiting room communication strategy, designed to raise awareness of potential harms of unnecessary imaging, on lumbar imaging rates in the emergency department (ED). METHODS: We conducted a controlled experimental study with a replicated time series design. The design included a 6-week run-in time. Following this there were alternating 1-week intervention and control periods. The intervention group received a communication strategy describing the potential harms of unnecessary imaging for low back pain, shown on a 55" LCD screen positioned in the ED waiting room. The communication strategy was designed by a creative innovation agency and included five digital posters and a patient leaflet. The control group received standard messaging for the waiting room at the time, shown on the same 55" LCD screen, and access to the patient leaflet. The primary outcome was the number and proportion of people presenting to ED with low back pain who received at least one lumbar imaging test, measured using routinely collected ED data. Secondary patient-reported outcomes (patient satisfaction and awareness of campaign messages) were collected from a sample of people presenting for any condition who responded to a text-message-based survey. RESULTS: For the imaging outcome, 337 people presenting to ED with low back pain were included over a 4-month period (intervention n = 99; control n = 238). All had available data on lumbar imaging. Use of lumbar imaging was 25% in those exposed to the communication strategy [95% confidence interval (CI) = 18% to 35%] compared with 29% in those exposed to the standard waiting room messaging [95% CI = 23% to 35%; odds ratio (OR) = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.41]. For the patient-reported outcomes, 349 patients presenting to ED for any condition responded to the survey (intervention n = 170; control n = 179; response rate = 33%). There was uncertain evidence that the intervention increased awareness of the communication strategy leaflet (OR = 2.00, 95% CI = 0.90 to 4.47). Other measures did not suggest between-group differences in patient satisfaction or awareness of the campaign messages. CONCLUSION: A communication strategy displayed in the ED waiting room may slightly reduce the proportion of patients with low back pain who receive lumbar imaging, although there is uncertainty due to imprecision. The campaign did not appear to increase awareness of campaign messages or affect patient satisfaction in a sample of patients presenting to the ED for any reason. Larger studies should investigate whether simple, low-cost waiting room communication strategies can raise awareness of unnecessary healthcare and influence health-care quality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN12620000300976, 05/03/2020.

Understanding overuse of diagnostic imaging for patients with low back pain in the Emergency Department: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Overuse of lumbar imaging in the Emergency Department is a well-recognised healthcare challenge. Studies to date have not provided robust evidence that available interventions can reduce overuse. For an intervention aimed at reducing imaging to be effective, insight into how both patients and clinicians view lumbar imaging tests is essential. AIM: To explore factors that might influence overuse of lumbar imaging in the Emergency Department. METHODS: Participants were recruited from three hospitals in Sydney, Australia between April and August 2019. We conducted focus groups and/or interviews with 14 patients and 12 clinicians. Sessions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed using framework analysis by a team of four researchers with diverse backgrounds. RESULTS: Patients described feeling that the decision about lumbar imaging was made by their Emergency Department clinician and reported little involvement in the decision-making process. Other potential drivers of lumbar imaging overuse from the patients' perspective were strong expectations for lumbar imaging, a reluctance to delay receiving a diagnosis, and requirements from third parties (eg, insurance companies) to have imaging. Emergency Department clinicians suggested that the absence of an ongoing therapeutic relationship, and the inability to manage perceived patient pressure could drive overuse of lumbar imaging. Suggested protective factors included: involving patients in the decision, ensuring clinicians have the ability to explain the reasons to avoid imaging and collaborative approaches to care both within the Emergency Department and with primary care. CONCLUSION AND KEY FINDINGS: We found several factors that could contribute to overuse of lumbar imaging in the Emergency Department. Solutions to overuse of lumbar imaging in the Emergency Department could include: (1) strategies to involve patients in decisions about imaging; (2) training and support to provide thorough and well explained clinical assessment for low back pain; and (3) systems that support collaborative approaches to care.

"I would not go to him": Focus groups exploring community responses to a public health campaign aimed at reducing unnecessary diagnostic imaging of low back pain.

BACKGROUND: Community awareness of the harms of overdiagnosis remains low. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate community responses to a public health campaign designed for health service waiting rooms that focuses on the harms of unnecessary diagnostic imaging for low back pain. METHODS: We conducted two focus groups of 19 community members with or without low back pain in Sydney, Australia. This study formed the fourth and final stage of the development process of a public health campaign: (a) initial design, (b) expert review and revision, (c) online experiment and (d) community views & revision. We evaluated reactions to components of the campaign that included digital posters and an information leaflet using strong imagery and messaging about the risk of overdiagnosis. We conducted a qualitative thematic analysis to identify main themes. RESULTS: Community members reacted with surprise, initial mistrust, and occasionally anger towards imagery and messaging that suggested diagnostic imaging tests could be unnecessary and harmful. With further reflection and discussion, and after reading longer format information about overdiagnosis, the participants found some of the messages informative and useful. Participants appeared to gain a better understanding of the concept of overdiagnosis and the importance of not rushing to imaging. CONCLUSIONS: Public health campaigns including posters and leaflets displayed in waiting rooms could raise awareness about overuse of diagnostic imaging and the harms of overdiagnosis more broadly. However, negative reactions are possible and must be managed carefully. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: We involved a community participation manager who provided advice on the focus group discussion guide, participant recruitment and manuscript presentation.

Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of Nepali versions of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Pain Intensity, Pain Interference, Pain Behavior, Depression, and Sleep Disturbance short forms in chronic musculoskeletal pain.

PURPOSE: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Meaurement Information System (PROMIS®) measures have been translated into many languages and have been shown to have strong measurement properties across a wide range of clinical conditions. However, Nepali translations of the PROMIS short forms are not yet available. The aim of this study was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the PROMIS Pain Intensity, Pain Interference, Pain Behavior, Depression, and Sleep Disturbance short forms into Nepali. METHODS: We used the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy (FACIT) translation methodology, which incorporated two forward translations, synthesis of the translations, a back-translation, and three independent reviews, harmonization, cognitive debriefing, revisions, and proof reading. The translation and review teams were fluent in Nepali and English and represented five different countries and four continents. We evaluated the short forms for comprehensibility and relevance (two key aspects of the content validity of an instrument), conducting cognitive debriefing with six adults with chronic musculoskeletal pain, in compliance with recommendations by the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement INstruments (COSMIN). The final version was proofread by two native Nepali speakers before and three new proofreaders after cognitive debriefing. RESULTS: All five short forms were successfully translated and cross-culturally adapted into Nepali while maintaining equivalence to the source. CONCLUSIONS: The translation and review team, along with a sample from the target population with chronic musculoskeletal pain and the proofreaders considered all five PROMIS short forms relevant and comprehensible. An important next step is to evaluate the measurement properties of these instruments.

Effect of information format on intentions and beliefs regarding diagnostic imaging for non-specific low back pain: A randomised controlled trial in members of the public.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of information format on intentions to request diagnostic imaging for non-specific low back pain in members of the public. METHODS: We performed a three arm, 1:1:1, superiority randomised trial on members of the public. Participants were randomised to one of the three groups: a Standard Care Leaflet group (standard information on low back pain), a Neutral Leaflet group (balanced information on the benefits and harms of imaging) and a Nudge Leaflet group (with behavioural cues to emphasise the harms of unnecessary imaging). Our primary outcome was intention to request imaging for low back pain. RESULTS: 418 participants were randomised. After reading the leaflet, intention to request imaging (measured on an 11-point scale (0 = definitely would not request to 10 = definitely would request) was lower in the Nudge Leaflet group (mean = 4.6, SD = 3.4) compared with the Standard Care Leaflet group (mean = 5.3, SD = 3.3) and the Neutral Leaflet group (mean = 5.3, SD = 3.0) (adjusted mean difference between Nudge and Neutral, -1.0 points, 95%CI -1.6 to -0.4). CONCLUSION: Framing information to emphasise potential harms from overdiagnosis reduced intention to request diagnostic imaging for low back pain. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Nudge leaflets could help clinicians manage patient pressure for unnecessary tests.

A look into the challenges and complexities of managing low back pain in Mexico.

Low back pain is a global health problem. In Mexico it is one of the most common musculoskeletal conditions as well as the leading cause of disability. This review provides an overview of the challenges and complexities of managing low back pain in Mexico. It begins with an explanation of the Mexican healthcare system and an overview of the burden of low back pain. Usual care for low back pain in Mexico is then contrasted with recommended best practice care to highlight common evidence-practice gaps and drivers of poor care. Finally, solutions are proposed based on positive experiences from other countries. Delving into the Mexican health framework and the burden of low back pain will provide a better understanding of why it is important to pay attention to this musculoskeletal disorder. Potential steps required to reduce the burden are also outlined to benefit not only the people suffering from low back pain but also the Mexican economy and society.

Patient and general practitioner views of tools to delay diagnostic imaging for low back pain: a qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: Delayed prescribing is a promising strategy to manage patient requests for unnecessary tests and treatments. The purpose of this study was to explore general practitioner (GP) and patient views of three communication tools (Overdiagnosis Leaflet, Dialogue Sheet and 'Wait-and-see' Note) to support delayed prescribing of diagnostic imaging. DESIGN: Qualitative study. SETTING: Primary and emergency care in Sydney, Australia. PARTICIPANTS: 16 GPs and 14 patients with recent episode of low back pain. OUTCOME: Views on the tools to delay diagnostic imaging for low back pain. Data were collected using a combination of focus groups and individual interviews. ANALYSIS: Two researchers independently performed a thematic analysis, and the author team reviewed and refined the analysis. RESULTS: GP participants responded positively to the Overdiagnosis Leaflet. The Dialogue Sheet and 'Wait-and-see' Note raised several concerns about patient pushback, adding to time pressure and being overwhelmed with hard-to-find paper resources. GPs preferred to communicate verbally the reasons to delay an imaging test. For patients, the reactions to the tools were more positive. Patients valued written information and a signed agreement to delay the test. However, patients expressed that a strong desire for diagnostic imaging would likely over-ride any effect of written advice to delay the test. The term 'false alarm' to describe overdiagnosis was poorly understood by patients. CONCLUSIONS: GPs and patients agreed that a leaflet about overdiagnosis could support a delayed prescribing approach to imaging for low back pain. The Dialogue Sheet and 'Wait-and-see' Note were acceptable to patients but not to GPs.

Clinician and patient beliefs about diagnostic imaging for low back pain: a systematic qualitative evidence synthesis.

OBJECTIVE: Overuse of diagnostic imaging for patients with low back pain remains common. The underlying beliefs about diagnostic imaging that could drive overuse remain unclear. We synthesised qualitative research that has explored clinician, patient or general public beliefs about diagnostic imaging for low back pain. DESIGN: A qualitative evidence synthesis using a thematic analysis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, AMED and PsycINFO from inception to 17 June 2019. Qualitative studies that interviewed clinicians, patients and/or general public exploring beliefs about diagnostic imaging for low back pain were included. Four review authors independently extracted data and organised these according to themes and subthemes. We used the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme tool to critically appraise included studies. To assess confidence in review findings, we used the GRADE-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research method. RESULTS: We included 69 qualitative studies with 1747 participants. Key findings included: Patients and clinicians believe diagnostic imaging is an important test to locate the source of low back pain (33 studies, high confidence); patients with chronic low back pain believe pathological findings on diagnostic imaging provide evidence that pain is real (12 studies, moderate confidence); and clinicians ordered diagnostic imaging to reduce the risk of a missed diagnosis that could lead to litigation, and to manage patients' expectations (12 studies, moderate confidence). CONCLUSION: Clinicians and patients can believe that diagnostic imaging is an important tool for locating the source of non-specific low back pain. Patients may underestimate the harms of unnecessary imaging tests. These beliefs could be important targets for intervention. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42017076047.