Division of Physical Therapy, Duke MSK, Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Br J Sports Med. 2018 Apr;52(8):493-496. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098352. Epub 2017 Sep 18.
Screening for red flags in individuals with low back pain (LBP) has been a historical hallmark of musculoskeletal management. Red flag screening is endorsed by most LBP clinical practice guidelines, despite a lack of support for their diagnostic capacity. We share four major reasons why red flag screening is not consistent with best practice in LBP management: (1) clinicians do not actually screen for red flags, they manage the findings; (2) red flag symptomology negates the utility of clinical findings; (3) the tests lack the negative likelihood ratio to serve as a screen; and (4) clinical practice guidelines do not include specific processes that aid decision-making. Based on these findings, we propose that clinicians consider: (1) the importance of watchful waiting; (2) the value-based care does not support clinical examination driven by red flag symptoms; and (3) the recognition that red flag symptoms may have a stronger relationship with prognosis than diagnosis.
对腰痛(LBP)患者进行“红色警报”筛查一直是肌肉骨骼管理的历史标志。尽管缺乏对其诊断能力的支持,但大多数 LBP 临床实践指南都认可红色警报筛查。我们分享了红色警报筛查不符合 LBP 管理最佳实践的四个主要原因:(1)临床医生实际上并没有筛查红色警报,而是对发现的问题进行管理;(2)红色警报症状否定了临床发现的效用;(3)这些测试缺乏阴性似然比,无法作为筛查手段;(4)临床实践指南没有包含有助于决策的具体流程。基于这些发现,我们建议临床医生考虑:(1)密切观察等待的重要性;(2)基于价值的护理不支持基于红色警报症状的临床检查;(3)认识到红色警报症状与预后的关系可能比诊断更为密切。