A critical appraisal of the quality of low back pain practice guidelines using the AGREE II tool and comparison with previous evaluations: a EuroAIM initiative
To assess the methodologic quality of guidelines for the management of low back pain (LBP) and compare their recommendations.
No ethics committee approval was needed for this systematic review. In March 2017, a systematic search was performed using MEDLINE, EMBASE, National Guideline Clearinghouse, and National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence to find practice guidelines of assessment and management of LBP. The evaluation of guidelines quality was performed independently by four authors using the AGREE II tool, and the results were compared with previous appraisals performed in 2004 and 2009.
Of 114 retrieved guidelines, eight were appraised. All except one reached the level of “acceptable” in overall result, with two of them reaching the highest scores. Only two guidelines reached a level of “acceptable” in every domain; the others had at least one domain with low scores. The guidelines had the higher scores (range = 63–94%) on “Scope and purpose” and “Clarity of presentation” (47–89%). “Stakeholder Involvement” has the highest variability between the guidelines results (40–96%). “Rigor of Development” reached an intermediate mean result (34–90%), “Applicability” (42–70%), and “Editorial Independence” (38–85%). Only three guidelines had a radiologist among authors and reached higher scores compared to guidelines without a radiologist among the authors. Compared to previous assessments, low-level guidelines were 53% in 2004, 36% in 2009, and 13% in 2017.
Considering all guidelines, only one had a “low” overall score, while half of them were rated as of “high” quality. Future guidelines might take this into account to improve clinical applicability.
KeywordsSystematic review Guidelines AGREE II Low back pain Lumbar pain
This work has been conducted within the framework of the Network for Assessment of Imaging in Medicine (EuroAIM), research platform of the European Institute for Biomedical Research under the umbrella of the European Society of Radiology (http://www.eibir.org/scientific-activities/jointinitiatives/euroaim/). Francesco Sardanelli is chair of the EuroAIM initiative, Luca Maria Sconfienza is the coordinator of the guideline evaluation project, while the other authors are members of the EuroAIM working group.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
Authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose related to the present paper.
- 9.Egger M, Smith GD, Altman DG (2008) Systematic reviews in health care: meta-analysis in context. BMJ Books, London. ISBN 978-0-727-91488-0Google Scholar
- 10.Sardanelli F, Bashir H, Berzaczy D et al (2014) The role of imaging specialists as authors of systematic reviews on diagnostic and interventional imaging and its impact on scientific quality: report from the EuroAIM evidence-based radiology working group. Radiology 272:533–540. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.14131730 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.van Tulder MW, Tuut M, Pennick V et al (2004) Quality of primary care guidelines for acute low back pain. Spine 29:E357–E362. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000137056.64166.51 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 17.AGREE Next Steps Consortium (2017) The AGREE II Instrument [Electronic version]. http://www.agreetrust.org. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 19.Messina C, Bignotti B, Bazzocchi A et al (2017) A critical appraisal of the quality of adult dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry guidelines in osteoporosis using the AGREE II tool: an EuroAIM initiative. Insights Imaging 8:311–317. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13244-017-0553-6 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 21.Chiodo AE, Alvarez DJ, Graziano GP et al (2010) Acute low back pain. Clinical alignment and performance excellence. Updated 2010. http://www.med.umich.edu/1info/FHP/practiceguides/back/back.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 23.Goertz M, Thorson D, Bonsell J et al (2012) Adult acute and subacute low back pain. Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
- 24.Toward Optimized Practice (TOP) Low Back Pain Working Group (2015) Evidence-informed primary care management of low back pain: clinical practice guideline. Edmonton, AB: Toward optimized practice. http://www.topalbertadoctors.org/cpgs/885801. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 25.The National Guideline Centre (UK) (2016) Low back pain and sciatica in over 16 s: assessment and management. 2016, NICE, London. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng59. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 26.Allegri M, Montella S, Salici F et al (2016) Mechanisms of low back pain: a guide for diagnosis and therapy. Version 2. F1000Res. https://f1000research.com/articles/5-1530/v2#article-reports. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 30.Bigos S, Bowyer O, Braen G (1994) Acute low back problems in adults. Clinical practice guideline no. 14. AHCPR Publication No. 95-0642. Rockville, MD: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, Public Health Service, U.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesGoogle Scholar
- 31.Faas A, Chavannes AW, Koes BW et al (1996) NHG-Standard ‘lage-rugpijn’. Huisarts Wet 39:18–31Google Scholar
- 33.National Health Committee. National Advisory Committee on Health and Disability, Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation (1997) New Zealand acute low back pain guide. Wellington, New Zealand. https://www.healthnavigator.org.nz/media/1006/nz-acute-low-back-pain-guide-acc.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 34.Kendall NAS, Linton SJ, Main CJ (1997) Guide to assessing psychosocial yellow flags in acute low back pain: risk factors for long-term disability and work loss. Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation of New Zealand and the National Health Committee, Wellington, New ZealandGoogle Scholar
- 35.Malmivaara A, Kotilainen E, Laasonen E et al (1999) Clinical practice guidelines of the Finnish medical association duodecim. Diseases of the Low Back, FinlandGoogle Scholar
- 36.Keel P, Weber M, Roux E et al (1998) Kreuzschmerzen: Hintergrunde, Pravention, Behandlung. Verbindung der Schweizer rzte, BernGoogle Scholar
- 37.Veterans Health Administration (2001) Low back pain or sciatica in the primary care setting. Department of veterans affairs, office of quality and performance, Washington, DC. https://www.healthquality.va.gov/guidelines/Pain/lbp/VADoDLBPCPG092917.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 38.Agency for Health Care Administration and the Florida Department of Health (1999) University of Florida patients with low back pain or injury: medical practice guidelinesGoogle Scholar
- 39.Nachemson AL, Jonsson E (2000) Neck and back pain: the scientific evidence of causes, diagnosis, and treatment. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
- 40.Danish Institute for Health Technology Assessment (2000) Low back pain: frequency, management and prevention from a health technology perspective. National Board of Health, Copenhagen, Denmark. http://www.chiro.org/LINKS/GUIDELINES/FULL/Low_Back_Pain_Frequency_Management.shtml. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 41.Arzneimittelkommission der deutschen rtzeschaft (2000) Empfehlungen zur Therapie von Kreuzschmerzen. Koln, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- 43.Hutchinson A, Waddell G, Feder G et al (1996) Clinical guidelines for the management of acute low back pain. Royal College of General Practitioners, London. http://www.chiro.org/LINKS/GUIDELINES/FULL/Royal_College/index.html
- 44.Bekkering GE, Hendriks HJM, Koes BW et al (2001) KNGF-richtlijn lage rugpijn. Ned Tijdschr Fysiother 111:1–24Google Scholar
- 45.Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (2001) Health care guideline: adult low back pain. Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
- 46.Philadelphia panel (2001) Philadelphia panel evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on selected rehabilitation interventions for low back pain. Phys Ther 81:1641–1674Google Scholar
- 47.The Dutch Institute for Healthcare Improvement (2003) Clinical guideline for non-specific low back pain. Ned Tijdschr Fys 113:1–24 (in Dutch) Google Scholar
- 48.Australian Acute Musculoskeletal Pain Guidelines Group (2003) Management of acute musculoskeletal pain (National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication). Brisbane, Australia: Australian Academic Press. http://www.sif-fisioterapia.it/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Acute-Musculoscheletral-Pain-Australia-2003.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 51.National Health Committee (2004) New Zealand acute low back pain guide. National Advisory Committee on Health and Disability, Accident Rehabilitation and Compensation Insurance Corporation, Wellington, New Zealand. https://www.healthnavigator.org.nz/media/1006/nz-acute-low-back-pain-guide-acc.pdf. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 52.Institute for Clinical Systems Improvement (ICSI) (2005) Adult low back pain. ICSI, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
- 54.Chavannes AW, Mens JMA, Koes BW et al (2005) Dutch general practice guideline for non-specific low back pain. Huisarts Wet 48:113–123 (in Dutch) Google Scholar
- 55.Negrini S, Giovannoni S, Minozzi S et al (2006) Diagnostic therapeutic flow-charts for low back pain patients: the Italian clinical guidelines. Euro Medicophys 42:151–170Google Scholar
- 56.Drug Committee of the German Medical Society (2007) Recommendations for treatment of low back pain. Koln, Germany (in German) Google Scholar
- 57.Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee of the American College of Physicians, American College of Physicians, American Pain Society Low Back Pain Guidelines Panel et al (2007) Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society. Ann Intern Med 147:478–491. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-147-7-200710020-00006 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 59.Rossignol M, Arsenault B, Dionne C et al (2007) Clinic on Low-back pain in interdisciplinary practice (CLIP) guidelines. http://www.santpub-mtl.qc.ca/clip. Accessed 13 June 2018
- 60.Stubbs B, Koyanagi A, Thompson T et al (2016) The epidemiology of back pain and its relationship with depression, psychosis, anxiety, sleep disturbances, and stress sensitivity: data from 43 low- and middle-income countries. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 43:63–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2016.09.008 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar