Jarvik Jeffrey G, Hollingworth William, Martin Brook, Emerson Scott S, Gray Darryl T, Overman Steven, Robinson David, Staiger Thomas, Wessbecher Frank, Sullivan Sean D, Kreuter William, Deyo Richard A
Department of Radiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash 98195, USA.
JAMA. 2003 Jun 4;289(21):2810-8. doi: 10.1001/jama.289.21.2810.
CONTEXT: Faster magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning has made MRI a potential cost-effective replacement for radiographs for patients with low back pain. However, whether rapid MRI scanning results in better patient outcomes than radiographic evaluation or a cost-effective alternative is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical and economic consequences of replacing spine radiographs with rapid MRI for primary care patients. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Randomized controlled trial of 380 patients aged 18 years or older whose primary physicians had ordered that their low back pain be evaluated by radiographs. The patients were recruited between November 1998 and June 2000 from 1 of 4 imaging centers in the Seattle, Wash, area: a university-based teaching program, a nonuniversity-based teaching program, and 2 private clinics. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned to receive lumbar spine evaluation by rapid MRI or by radiograph. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Back-related disability measured by the modified Roland questionnaire. Secondary outcomes included Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36), pain, preference scores, satisfaction, and costs. RESULTS: At 12 months, primary outcomes of functional disability were obtained from 337 (89%) of the 380 patients enrolled. The mean back-related disability modified Roland score for the 170 patients assigned to the radiograph evaluation group was 8.75 vs 9.34 for the 167 patients assigned the rapid MRI evaluation group (mean difference, -0.59; 95% CI, -1.69 to 0.87). The mean differences in the secondary outcomes were not statistically significant : pain bothersomeness (0.07; 95% CI -0.88 to 1.22), pain frequency (0.12; 95% CI, -0.69 to 1.37), and SF-36 subscales of bodily pain (1.25; 95% CI, -4.46 to 4.96), and physical functioning (2.73, 95% CI -4.09 to 6.22). Ten patients in the rapid MRI group vs 4 in the radiograph group had lumbar spine operations (risk difference, 0.34; 95% CI, -0.06 to 0.73). The rapid MRI strategy had a mean cost of 2380 dollars vs 2059 dollars for the radiograph strategy (mean difference, 321 dollars; 95% CI, -1100 to 458). CONCLUSIONS: Rapid MRIs and radiographs resulted in nearly identical outcomes for primary care patients with low back pain. Although physicians and patients preferred the rapid MRI, substituting rapid MRI for radiographic evaluations in the primary care setting may offer little additional benefit to patients, and it may increase the costs of care because of the increased number of spine operations that patients are likely to undergo.
背景:更快的磁共振成像(MRI)扫描使MRI成为腰痛患者X线片潜在的性价比高的替代检查方法。然而,快速MRI扫描是否比X线评估能带来更好的患者预后,或者是否是一种性价比高的替代方法尚不清楚。 目的:确定对初级保健患者用快速MRI取代脊柱X线片的临床和经济后果。 设计、地点和患者:对380名18岁及以上的患者进行随机对照试验,这些患者的初级医生已下令通过X线片对其腰痛进行评估。这些患者于1998年11月至2000年6月从华盛顿州西雅图地区的4个影像中心中的1个招募:一个基于大学的教学项目、一个非基于大学的教学项目和2个私人诊所。 干预措施:患者被随机分配接受快速MRI或X线片进行腰椎评估。 主要结局指标:通过改良罗兰问卷测量与背部相关的残疾情况。次要结局包括医学结局研究36项简短健康调查(SF - 36)、疼痛、偏好评分、满意度和费用。 结果:在12个月时,从380名入组患者中的337名(89%)获得了功能残疾的主要结局。分配到X线片评估组的170名患者的平均与背部相关的残疾改良罗兰评分为8.75,而分配到快速MRI评估组的167名患者为9.34(平均差异为 - 0.59;95%置信区间为 - 1.69至0.87)。次要结局的平均差异无统计学意义:疼痛困扰(0.07;95%置信区间为 - 0.88至1.22)、疼痛频率(0.12;95%置信区间为 - 0.69至1.37)、SF - 36身体疼痛子量表(1.25;95%置信区间为 - 4.46至4.96)和身体功能(2.73,95%置信区间为 - 4.09至6.22)。快速MRI组有10名患者进行了腰椎手术,而X线片组有4名(风险差异为0.34;95%置信区间为 - 0.06至0.73)。快速MRI策略的平均费用为2380美元,而X线片策略为2059美元(平均差异为321美元;95%置信区间为 - 1100至458)。 结论:对于初级保健的腰痛患者,快速MRI和X线片产生的结局几乎相同。尽管医生和患者更喜欢快速MRI,但在初级保健环境中用快速MRI替代X线评估可能对患者几乎没有额外益处,并且由于患者可能接受的脊柱手术数量增加,可能会增加护理成本。
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002-10-15
J Fam Pract. 1995-5
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012-1-15
Diagnostics (Basel). 2025-6-27
Arch Rehabil Res Clin Transl. 2023-5-26
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023-8-24
Korean J Intern Med. 2023-1
Q J Econ. 2015-11
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2021-11-24