Cited by 174Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitationSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyPregnancy-related medical research

Primary care management of non-specific low back pain: key messages from recent clinical guidelines

Almeida, Matheus, Saragiotto, Bruno, Richards, Bethan, Maher, Chris G·2018·Medical Journal of Australia

Abstract

Introduction: Research in the past decade supports some major changes to the primary care management of non-specific low back pain (LBP). The present article summarises recommendations from recently published United Kingdom, Danish, Belgian and United States guidelines to alert readers to the important changes in recommendations for management, and the recommendations from previous guidelines that remain unchanged. Main recommendations: Use a clinical assessment to triage patients with LBP. Further diagnostic workup is only required for the small number of patients with suspected serious pathology. For many patients with non-specific LBP, simple first line care (advice, reassurance and self-management) and a review at 1–2 weeks is all that is required. If patients need second line care, non-pharmacological treatments (eg, physical and psychological therapies) should be tried before pharmacological therapies. If pharmacological therapies are used, they should be used at the lowest effective dose and for the shortest period of time possible. Exercise and/or cognitive behavioural therapy, with multidisciplinary treatment for more complex presentations, are recommended for patients with chronic LBP. Electrotherapy, traction, orthoses, bed rest, surgery, injections and denervation procedures are not recommended for patients with non-specific LBP. Changes in management as a result of the guidelines: The major changes include: emphasising simple first line care with early follow-up; encouraging non-pharmacological treatments over pharmacological treatments; and recommending against the use of surgery, injections and denervation procedures.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5694/mja17.01152

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Almeida, M., Saragiotto, B., Richards, B., & Maher, C. G.
Affiliations
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • The University of Sydney (AU)
  • Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (AU)
  • University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW
Venue
Medical Journal of Australia
Publisher
AMPCo
Published
2018-04
Volume
208
Issue
6
Pages
272-275
ISSN
  • 0025-729X (ISSN-L)
  • 1326-5377
OpenAlex
W2794567591
Cited by
174
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 7
FWCI
10.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Medical Journal of Australia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Spine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Pregnancy-related medical research
Keywords
non-specific low back pain, primary care management, triage, self-management, non-pharmacological treatment, exercise therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, multidisciplinary treatment, chronic low back pain, pharmacotherapy, electrotherapy, traction, orthoses, bed rest, spinal injections, denervation
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Humans, Primary Health Care, Triage, Low Back Pain, Practice Guidelines as Topic, Risk Assessment

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review