Radiology, Vol 204, 447-454, Copyright © 1997 by Radiological Society of North America

ARTICLES

Rapid MR imaging versus plain radiography in patients with low back pain: initial results of a randomized study

JG Jarvik, KR Maravilla, DR Haynor, M Levitz and RA Deyo
Department of Radiology, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle 98195, USA.

PURPOSE: To demonstrate the feasibility of a randomized trial to compare rapid magnetic resonance (MR) imaging with plain radiography as the initial imaging study in patients with low back pain, to test measures of the decision-making process and patient outcomes, and to offer a model for using randomized clinical trials to evaluate diagnostic tests. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The authors randomly selected 62 patients with low back pain to undergo either rapid MR imaging or plain radiography. The authors measured functional status, satisfaction, and general health status at baseline and at 3 months. The modified Roland scale was the primary outcome measure. In addition, the authors examined diagnostic and therapeutic decision making and resources used by each group. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences between the two patient groups with respect to outcome (Roland score: MR imaging = 12.5, radiography = 12.1). MR imaging provided more useful information to clinicians and resulted in greater patient reassurance. CONCLUSION: Randomly selecting patients to undergo imaging examinations and measuring outcomes is feasible; however, a larger, multicenter study is necessary to determine whether rapid MR imaging is a cost-effective replacement for plain radiography in patients with low back pain.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				H. O. Stolberg, G. Norman, and I. Trop Randomized Controlled Trials Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2004; 183(6): 1539 - 1544. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. E. A. P. M. Adriaensen, M. C. J. M. Kock, T. Stijnen, M. R. H. M. van Sambeek, H. van Urk, P. M. T. Pattynama, and M. G. Myriam Hunink Peripheral Arterial Disease: Therapeutic Confidence of CT versus Digital Subtraction Angiography and Effects on Additional Imaging Recommendations Radiology, November 1, 2004; 233(2): 385 - 391. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. G. Jarvik, W. Hollingworth, B. Martin, S. S. Emerson, D. T. Gray, S. Overman, D. Robinson, T. Staiger, F. Wessbecher, S. D. Sullivan, et al. Rapid Magnetic Resonance Imaging vs Radiographs for Patients With Low Back Pain: A Randomized Controlled Trial JAMA, June 4, 2003; 289(21): 2810 - 2818. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Lipton, E. Riddle, L. Grissom, T. Fitru, H. Marks, and S. J. Kumar An Unusual Cause of Low-Back Pain in Children : A Report of Two Cases J. Bone Joint Surg. Am., October 1, 2001; 83(10): 1552 - 1554. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. G. C. Gillan, F. J. Gilbert, J. E. Andrew, A. M. Grant, D. Wardlaw, N. W. Valentine, A. C. Gregori, and For the Scottish Back Trial Group Influence of Imaging on Clinical Decision Making in the Treatment of Lower Back Pain Radiology, August 1, 2001; 220(2): 393 - 399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M.G. M. Hunink and G. P. Krestin Study Design for Concurrent Development, Assessment, and Implementation of New Diagnostic Imaging Technology Radiology, March 1, 2002; 222(3): 604 - 614. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]