You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT JAMA
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 246 No. 10, September 4, 1981 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  JAMA
  •  Online Features
  ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTIONS
 This Article
 •References
 •Full text PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (38)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Similar articles in JAMA
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Use of Lumbar Spine Films

Statistical Evaluation at a University Teaching Hospital

Jerome G. Scavone, MD; Robert F. Latshaw, MD; G. Victor Rohrer, MD

JAMA. 1981;246(10):1105-1108.


Abstract

Use of lumbar spine films was evaluated in a retrospective review of 1,095 lumbar radiological examinations in 871 patients. Patients' histories and physical examination findings were correlated with four groups of radiological findings: (1) radiologically normal, (2) incidental findings unrelated to patients' complaints, (3) diagnostic films compatible with symptoms, and (4) radiological findings of questionable clinical significance. The high percentage of nondiagnostic and questionable results suggests overuse of lumbar spine films. Forty-six percent of all studies in this investigation were normal or had incidental findings, and an additional 31.8% had radiological findings of questionable clinical significance. Three hundred seventy-five follow-up examinations (64.2%) demonstrated no radiological interval changes. Radiation exposure and medical cost of noncontributory studies may be substantially reduced by judicious consideration of the potential diagnostic yield of the examination and by careful selection of repeated or follow-up studies.

(JAMA 1981;246:1105-1108)



Author Affiliations

From the Department of Radiology, The Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Pennsylvania State University, Hershey.


Footnotes

Reprint requests to The Milton S. Hershey Medical Center, Pennsylvania State University, 500 University Dr, Hershey, PA 17033 (Dr Scavone).



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Low back pain investigations and prognosis: a review
Refshauge and Maher
Br. J. Sports. Med. 2006;40:494-498.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Effectiveness of rehabilitation for spinal pain
Haigh and Clarke
Clin Rehabil 1999;13:63-81.
ABSTRACT  

Plain Roentgenography for Low-Back Pain: Finding Needles in a Haystack
DEYO
Arch Intern Med 1989;149:27-29.
ABSTRACT  

Roentgenograms in Primary Care Patients With Acute Low Back Pain: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis
Liang and Komaroff
Arch Intern Med 1982;142:1108-1112.
ABSTRACT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 1981 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.