Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Emergency department evaluation, treatment, and functional outcomes among patients presenting with low back pain.
Magel, Jake; Suslavich, Kayte; Roper, Keith; Fritz, Julie; Madsen, Troy.
Afiliação
  • Magel J; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
  • Suslavich K; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
  • Roper K; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
  • Fritz J; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America.
  • Madsen T; University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, United States of America. Electronic address: troy.madsen@hsc.utah.edu.
Am J Emerg Med ; 59: 37-41, 2022 09.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35777258
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES:

Low back pain (LBP) leads to more than 4.3 million emergency department (ED) visits annually. Despite the number of ED visits for LBP, emergency medicine societies have not established clear guidelines for the evaluation and care of these patients. This study aims to describe patterns in the evaluation, treatment, and outcomes of patients presenting to an urban, academic ED for atraumatic LBP.

METHODS:

We prospectively identified a convenience sample of patients presenting with LBP to the University of Utah Hospital ED between January 2017 and June 2018. We collected baseline demographic information and calculated the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Short Form 12a (PROMIS PFSF-12a) score to assess patient function and mobility (50 = average PROMIS PFSF-12a score, with higher scores indicating better function). We contacted patients 6 weeks after the ED visit to assess outpatient follow-up and functional outcomes.

RESULTS:

Over the 18-month study period, 103 patients presented with a chief complaint of LBP and agreed to participate in the study. Average age of the cohort was 48.5 years (SD = 18.3) and 55 (53.4%) were female. Notably, 61 patients (59.2%) had been seen previously in the ED for LBP and 32 (31.1%) had received an opioid for LBP in the preceding 3 months. In the ED, 35.9% of patient received an opioid while 18.5% had an opioid prescription at discharge. While in the ED, 37 (35.9%) had an x-ray and 47 (45.6%) underwent computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. At 6-week follow-up, 22 of 68 (32.4%) patients reported having missed work due to pain. PROMIS PFSF-12a score improved from 32.2 ("low" range) at time of ED visit to 42.0 ("low-average" range) at the 6-week follow up. Regarding outpatient follow-up after the ED visit, 22 patients (21.4%) saw a primary care provider, 12 patients (17.8%) saw orthopedics or neurosurgery, and 8 patients (11.8%) attended physical therapy.

CONCLUSIONS:

Patients receiving ED care for LBP had a significant improvement in PROMIS PFSF-12a scores 6 weeks after the ED but return to function continued to lag despite interventions. Imaging patterns, medication prescriptions, and outpatient follow-up varied widely, emphasizing the needs for clear guidelines and treatment pathways for ED patients with LBP.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Dor Lombar Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Dor Lombar Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies Limite: Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2022 Tipo de documento: Article