Skip to: Main Navigation | Main Content

This site is being redeveloped. For all the latest ABC Health content click here.

or try the A-Z Library

Lower back pain scans often unnecessary

by Dr Norman Swan

Scans for back pain are usually unnecessary, unless there are other warning signs, researchers say.

18 05 2009

backscan_300x150iStockPhoto

Watch Video

Low back pain is rife in Australia. Most of us will have an episode sometime in our lives. But 95 per cent of the time, there's nothing serious wrong – like cancer or an infection. Yet when we go to the doctor, it seems like a sensible thing to get a lumbar spine x-ray, a CT scan or sometimes even an MRI. And most GPs seem to agree. In 2008, one of the commonest reasons for ordering an x-ray or scan was non-specific back pain.

The fact is though that most of these are a waste of both time and money. Not only that, they could be dangerous. By exposure to excessive radiation from lumbar spine x-rays or CT scans, you increase the risk of cancer. But also, one of these tests could find an insignificant finding that leads to more tests and more risks.

Evidence-based guidelines consistently say that x- rays and scans are unnecessary in people with what's called "acute non-specific low back pain" – unless there are 'red flags'. Those are things like weight loss and fever, which give some cause for concern.

The recommended treatment for acute back pain is regular paracetamol, staying active, hot and cold packs and seeking medical advice if the pain persists. And if you do go to see your doctor, and he or she doesn't recommend an x-ray or scan, they're probably right.

Note: This is the transcript of the video version of this story and may differ slightly from the original audio version as broadcast on NewsRadio.

For Reference

Title: The Lancet
Author: Kochen MM et al. Imaging for low-back pain.
URL: http://www.thelancet.com/
2009;373:436-437

Title: The Lancet
Author: Chou R et al. Imaging strategies for low-back pain: systematic review and meta-analysis.
URL: http://www.thelancet.com/
2009;373:463-472