| Recommendations |
Evidence |
|
Carry out diagnostic triage
|
| Diagnostic triage forms the
basis for decisions about referral, investigation
and management |
| Diagnostic triage of acute low
back problems should be based on the clinical
history and examination: simple backache
(non-specific low back pain)
nerve root pain
possible serious spinal pathology (tumour,
infection, inflammatory disorders, cauda equina
syndrome, etc.)
|
|
| Recommendations |
Evidence |
|
There is no indication for routine x-rays in acute LBP
of less than 6 weeks in the absence of clinical red
flags.
|
| Royal College of Radiologists
recommendations |
|
| Unnecessary
or repeated x-rays should be avoided. |
| Lumbar spine x-rays involve 150
times the radiation dose of a chest x-ray. |
|
| Recommendations |
Evidence |
|
Assessment should include psychological, occupational
and socioeconomic factors in the patient's life since
such non-physical factors can complicate both assessment
and treatment.
|
| Psychological, social
and economic factors play an important role in
chronic back pain and disability. |
| Psychosocial factors are
important at a much earlier stage than previously
believed. |
|
| Management
and the advice given to patients should consider and
allow for psychosocial factors which can affect outcomes
and the chance of developing chronicity. |
| Psychosocial factors influence a
patient's response to treatment and
rehabilitation |
| A number of clinical features
are risk factors for developing chronic pain and
disability. |
| Psychosocial features are more
important risk factors for chronicity than
biomedical symptoms and signs. |
|
| Recommendations |
Evidence |
|
Advise paracetamol at regular intervals for simple
back ache.
|
| Paracetamol and paracetamol-weak
opioid compounds prescribed at regular intervals
effectively reduce low back pain. Comparisons of
effectiveness to NSAIDs are inconsistent. |
|
| Substitute
NSAIDs (eg ibuprofen or diclofenac) as second line
treatment if paracetamol does not provide adequate pain
control. |
| NSAIDs prescribed at regular
intervals effectively reduce simple back ache. |
| Different NSAIDs are equally
effective for the reduction of simple back ache. |
| NSAIDs are less effective for
the reduction of nerve root pain. |
| NSAIDs can have serious adverse
effects particularly at high doses and in the
elderly. Ibuprofen followed by diclofenac have
the lowest risk of gastrointestinal
complications. |
|
| Consider
replacement with paracetamol-weak opioid compound (eg
co-codamol) if neither paracetamol nor NSAIDs provide
adequate pain control. |
| Clinicians find that
paracetamol-weak opioid compounds may be
effective alternatives when paracetamol or NSAIDs
alone do not give adequate pain control. Adverse
effects |
|
| Consider
adding a short course (less than 1 week) of a muscle
relaxant (eg diazepam) if the above treatments do not
provide adequate pain control. |
| Muscle relaxants effectively
reduce acute back pain. |
| Comparisons of effectiveness
between muscle relaxants and NSAIDs are
inconsistent. There are no comparisons to
paracetamol. |
| Muscle relaxants have
significant adverse effects including drowsiness
and potential physical dependence even after
relatively short courses (i.e. one week). |
|
| Avoid
naracotics such as morphine, pethidine and pentazocine if
possible, and do not use for more than 2 weeks. |
| Strong opioids appear to be
no more effective in relieving low back pain
symptons than safer analgesics such as
paracetamol, aspirin or other NSAIDs. (C) |
| Strong opioids have
significant adverse effects such as decreased
reaction time, clouded judgement, drowsiness and
potential physical dependence. (C) |
|
| Recommendations |
Evidence |
|
Do not recommend or use bed rest as a treatment for
simple back pain.
The aim is to use symptomatic measures to control pain to
let patients return to normal activity as rapidly as
possible and to minimise bed rest. Some patients may
initially be confined to bed as a consequence of their
pain but this should not be considered as a treatment.
|
| For acute or recurrent LBP with
or without referred leg pain, bed rest for 2-7
days is worse than placebo or ordinary activity.
It is not as effective as the alternative
treatments to which it has been compared for
relief of pain, rate of recovery, return to daily
activities and days lost from work. |
|
| Recommendations |
Evidence |
|
Advise patients to stay as active as possible and to
continue normal daily activities.
|
| Advice to continue ordinary
activity can give equivalent or faster
symptomatic recovery from the acute attack, and
lead to less chronic disability and less time off
work than 'traditional' medical treatment with
analgesics as required, advice to rest and 'let
pain be your guide' for return to normal
acitvity. |
|
| Advise
patients to increase their physical activities
progressively over a few days or weeks. |
| Graded reactivation over a short
period of days or a few weeks, combined with
behavioural management of pain, makes little
difference to the rate of initial recovery of
pain and disability, but leads to less chronic
disability and work loss. |
|
| If a
patient is working, then advice to stay at work or return
to work as soon as possible is probably beneficial. |
| Advice to return to normal work
within a planned short time may lead to shorter
periods of work loss and less time off work. |
|
| Recommendations |
Evidence |
|
Consider manipulative treatment within the first 6
weeks for patients who need additional help with pain
relief or who are failing to return to normal activities.
|
| Within the first six weeks of
onset of acute or recurrent low back pain,
manipulation provides better short-term
improvement in pain and activity levels and
higher patient satisfaction than the treatments
to which it has been compared. However, there is
no firm evidence that it is possible to select
which patients will respond or what kind of
manipulation is most effective. |
| The evidence is inconclusive as
to whether manipulation for low back pain of more
than six weeks duration provides clinically
significant improvement in outcomes compared with
other treatments. There is conflicting evidence
from RCTs and systematic reviews on the
effectiveness of manipulation in chronic low back
pain |
| The risks of manipulation for
low back pain are very low, provided patients are
selected and assessed properly and it is carried
out by a trained therapist or practitioner.
Manipulation should not be used in patients with
severe or progressive neurological deficit in
view of the rare but serious risk of neurological
complication. |
|
| Recommendations |
Evidence |
|
Patients who have not returned to ordinary activities
and work by 6 weeks should be referred for reactivation /
rehabilitation.
|
| On the evidence available at
present, it is doubtful that specific back
exercises produce clinically significant
improvement in acute low back pain, or that it is
possible to select which patients will respond to
which exercises. |
| McKenzie exercises may produce
some short-term symptomatic improvement in acute
low back pain. |
| There is some evidence that
exercise programmes and physical reconditioning
can improve pain and functional levels in
patients with chronic low back pain. |
| There are strong
theoretical arguments for commencing exercise
programmes and physical reconditioning by 6 weeks
rather than later. |
|
Source; RCGP guidelines, adapted.