| Title |
Routine versus needs-based MRI in patients with prolonged low back pain: a comparison of duration of treatment, number of clinical contacts and referrals to surgery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Chiropractic & Manual Therapies, July 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1186/1746-1340-18-19 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rikke K Jensen, Manniche Claus, Charlotte Leboeuf-Yde |
| Abstract |
The routine use of radiology is normally discouraged in patients with low back pain (LBP). Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) provides clinicians and patients with detailed knowledge of spinal structures and has no known physical side effects. It is possible that insight into the pathological changes in LBP patients could affect patient management. However, to our knowledge, this has never been tested. Until June 2006, all patients at our specialised out-patient public clinic were referred for MRI on the basis of clinical indications, economic constraints, and availability of MRI (the "needs-based MRI" group). As a new approach, we now refer all patients who meet certain criteria for routine up-front MRI before the clinical examination (the "routine MRI" group). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Singapore | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 32 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 15% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 9% |
| Professor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 10 | 30% |
| Unknown | 4 | 12% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 45% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 12% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 18% |
| Unknown | 4 | 12% |