1 · SNAPSHOT

This entire page is free, permanently — all seven sections. Red flag content is never gated in CliniStudy.
Who: Older adults with vascular risk. Smoking, age, male sex, family history, cardiovascular disease and hypertension are the risk signals carried by the population evidence [1].
What: A dilated abdominal aorta. Usually silent until it is found by accident, or until it leaks (Aggarwal et al. 2011).
How it behaves: Deep, constant, boring pain in the lumbar spine, abdomen, flank or groin. Sometimes a pulsating or throbbing sensation. Unchanged by posture, movement or anything you do to it.
The one thing to take from this page:
You are not diagnosing an aneurysm. You are noticing that this pain does not behave like a musculoskeletal problem — and refusing to treat it as one.
| What the evidence settles | What it does not |
|---|---|
| Symptoms and physical signs cannot rule out rupture (Fernando et al. 2022) | No verified accuracy figure for any single sign in our library |
| Abdominal palpation is insensitive (Lynch 2004) | How often AAA presents to Australian physiotherapy — unknown |
| Ultrasound is first-line when a pulsatile mass is suspected (Desjardins et al. 2013) | Nothing here is a physiotherapy investigation |
⚠️ No Australian guideline governs this decision. Anchored to the European Society for Vascular Surgery 2024 guideline [2] and the US Society for Vascular Surgery guideline [3]. Both are written for vascular surgeons choosing repair thresholds, not for a student choosing whether to refer.
Patterns > Labels. The label here is a vascular diagnosis you will never make. The pattern is non-mechanical pain in a vascular-risk patient, and that you can recognise in the first five minutes.
2 · SE — THE SUBJECTIVE PATTERN (the 70%)
Five stages, in your course's order. On this pattern, BEHAVIOUR is the discriminator — which is unusual, because on most red flag patterns behaviour tells you nothing. Here, the absence of mechanical behaviour is the finding.
MAIN PROBLEM
"I've had this deep ache in my back for a few weeks and nothing shifts it."
"It's like a throbbing, right through to my front."
"It came on out of nowhere and it's just there, all the time."
BODY CHART
- P1 deep central or para-lumbar, often poorly localised and hard for the patient to outline with one finger.
- Mark the abdomen, flank and groin — not just the spine. Radiation to groin or flank is part of the pattern [4].
- Ask them to describe the quality: throbbing, pulsating, boring, deep. Those words matter here in a way they rarely do.
BEHAVIOUR
This is the section that decides it.
| Question | Mechanical answer | The answer that should stop you |
|---|---|---|
| Aggs? | A movement, a position, a load | "Nothing in particular." |
| Eases? | A position, rest, offloading | "Nothing helps." |
| Does lying down change it? | Usually yes | "No." |
| Better or worse through the day? | A pattern | "It's just constant." |
M / In / P / Is coding is close to useless here — and that is the point. A pain you cannot code because it does not vary is a pain that is not coming from a joint you can load.
HISTORY
- Onset without a mechanism in an older adult with vascular risk.
- Weeks of unremitting pain, or sudden severe onset. Both appear.
- Ask directly about a known aneurysm — many patients are already under surveillance and will tell you if asked.
SPECIAL / SCREENING QUESTIONS
These are not the last box on this pattern. They are the pattern.
- Smoking — current or past. The strongest modifiable risk signal in the population evidence (Altobelli et al. 2018).
- Age, sex, family history, cardiovascular disease, hypertension.
- Pulsating or throbbing sensation — ask in the patient's words, not yours.
- Collapse, syncope, sweating, feeling faint.
- Known AAA, or a relative with one.
Assessing this region? Download the Lumbar Spine & SIJ assessment template →
3 · HYPOTHESIS RANKING
Top three, and the single feature that separates each from this one. Rank them — then rule out the dangerous one first, even though it is the least likely.
| Competing pattern | The one discriminating feature |
|---|---|
| Non-specific low back pain | Mechanical. Changes with posture and load, has a position of ease, is reproducible on testing. AAA pain does none of that. |
| Spinal metastases | Constant, unremitting, worse at night, with a cancer history. Also non-mechanical — but the answer is urgent imaging and oncology, not a vascular emergency. |
| Renal colic | Flank pain with haematuria, fever or nausea, and a writhing patient who cannot get comfortable — rather than a deep constant ache with vascular risk. But don't let this row settle it: ruptured AAA is most often misdiagnosed as ureteric colic or myocardial infarction (Azhar et al. 2014) [16]. |
Note what this table does not do. None of these three is excluded by anything in your hands. The ranking exists to tell you which door to knock on first, not to close any of them.
The patient with a known, stable, surveilled aneurysm and a genuinely mechanical lumbar pattern also exists — and they are allowed to have back pain like anyone else. Stay inside the vascular team's plan; treat the mechanical problem.
4 · RED FLAGS — DON'T MISS THIS
This section is free, on every pattern, forever. Safety is never gated.
The escalation set
| Finding | What it means | What you do |
|---|---|---|
| Non-mechanical pain + vascular risk | The core pattern | Same-day medical assessment |
| Pulsating or throbbing sensation | Patient-reported, not palpated | Same-day medical assessment |
| Palpable expansile abdominal pulsation | May be present — often is not | Same-day medical assessment |
| Collapse, syncope, sweating | Suggests instability | Ambulance. Now. |
| Severe sudden abdominal / back pain + shock | Suspected rupture | Ambulance. Now. |
The two rules that survive everything else
1. Absence clears nothing. A normal abdomen, an unremarkable lumbar examination and a patient who looks well do not exclude an aneurysm. Physical examination is insensitive (Lynch 2004; Fernando et al. 2022). Even rupture can be quiet: in one multicentre cohort 11.8% denied pain altogether, hypotension and syncope were each documented in only a minority, and 20.0% had reported important symptoms up to 3 weeks earlier (Metcalfe et al. 2016) [17].
2. If you suspect it, you stop. No manual therapy, no exercise prescription, no "let's see how it goes over the week". Stop the musculoskeletal treatment and escalate.
Document what you found, what you did, and why. Write the red flags in the words the patient used, note vitals if you took them, and record the reason for escalation. That record is the safety net.
Cross-links: Non-specific low back pain · Cauda equina syndrome · Lumbar radicular pain
5 · OE — THE OBJECTIVE (the 30%)
Members
Sections 5 to 7 are for members
The objective exam, management and pearls, plus the six-minute lesson and the debrief. Free with an account.
Sign in or join free6 · MX — MANAGEMENT ESSENTIALS
Members
Sections 5 to 7 are for members
The objective exam, management and pearls, plus the six-minute lesson and the debrief. Free with an account.
Sign in or join free7 · CLINICAL PEARLS + RETRIEVAL CHECK
Members
Sections 5 to 7 are for members
The objective exam, management and pearls, plus the six-minute lesson and the debrief. Free with an account.
Sign in or join freeMembers
The 5-minute lesson is for members
Twelve slides on this pattern: what you'll hear, what to examine, what to do. Free with an account.
Sign in or join freeGuideline anchor
No Australian guideline governs how a physiotherapist screens for or escalates a suspected abdominal aortic aneurysm.
More
Anchored to the European Society for Vascular Surgery 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on abdominal aorto-iliac artery aneurysms (Wanhainen et al. 2024, PMID 38307694), supplemented by the Society for Vascular Surgery guideline (Chaikof et al. 2018, PMID 29268916) and the ACR Appropriateness Criteria for a pulsatile abdominal mass (Desjardins et al. 2013, PMID 22644671). Both are labelled as non-Australian on the page.
There is no Australian clinical care standard for AAA, and no Australian physiotherapy-facing screening guidance. The vascular guidelines that exist are written for vascular surgeons deciding on repair thresholds, not for a student deciding whether to send someone to an emergency department. Everything on this page about the physiotherapy decision is anchored to primary evidence and to the profession's own case literature, and is labelled as such.
Members
The evidence summary is for members
Verified diagnostic accuracy, where the evidence stands and what it doesn't settle. Free with an account.
Sign in or join freeSources · 15
ShowHide
Every source on this page resolves and title-verifies against PubMed. Newest first.
- 2018Altobelli et al. (2018). Risk Factors for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in Population-Based Studies: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International journal of environmental research and public health, 15(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15122805
- 2024Wanhainen et al. (2024). Editor's Choice -- European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2024 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Abdominal Aorto-Iliac Artery Aneurysms. European journal of vascular and endovascular surgery : the official journal of the European Society for Vascular Surgery, 67(2), 192-331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejvs.2023.11.002
- 2018Chaikof et al. (2018). The Society for Vascular Surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm. Journal of vascular surgery, 67(1), 2-77.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2017.10.044
- 2008Mechelli et al. (2008). Differential diagnosis of a patient referred to physical therapy with low back pain: abdominal aortic aneurysm. The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy, 38(9), 551-7. https://doi.org/10.2519/jospt.2008.2719
- 2020Ulug et al. (2020). Surgery for small asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 7(7), CD001835. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD001835.pub5
- 2004Norman et al. (2004). Population based randomised controlled trial on impact of screening on mortality from abdominal aortic aneurysm. BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 329(7477), 1259. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38272.478438.55
- 2004Lynch (2004). Accuracy of abdominal examination in the diagnosis of non-ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Accident and emergency nursing, 12(2), 99-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aaen.2003.09.005
- 2012Thompson et al. (2012). Final follow-up of the Multicentre Aneurysm Screening Study (MASS) randomized trial of abdominal aortic aneurysm screening. The British journal of surgery, 99(12), 1649-56. https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.8897
- 2013Desjardins et al. (2013). ACR Appropriateness Criteria® pulsatile abdominal mass, suspected abdominal aortic aneurysm. The international journal of cardiovascular imaging, 29(1), 177-83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-012-0044-2
- 2013Rubano et al. (2013). Systematic review: emergency department bedside ultrasonography for diagnosing suspected abdominal aortic aneurysm. Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 20(2), 128-38. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.12080
- 2019Guirguis-Blake et al. (2019). Primary Care Screening for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force. JAMA, 322(22), 2219-2238. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.17021
- 2020Schmitz-Rixen et al. (2020). Endovascular and Open Repair of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm. Deutsches Arzteblatt international, 117(48), 813-819. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2020.0813
- 2022Fernando et al. (2022). Accuracy of presenting symptoms, physical examination, and imaging for diagnosis of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, 29(4), 486-496. https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.14475
- 2023Menges et al. (2023). Ruptured abdominal aorto-iliac aneurysms: Diagnosis, treatment, abdominal compartment syndrome, and role of simulation-based training. Seminars in vascular surgery, 36(2), 163-173. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.semvascsurg.2023.03.002
- 2025Shaban et al. (2025). Enhancing clinical outcomes: Point of care ultrasound in the precision diagnosis and Management of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms in emergency medicine: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of clinical ultrasound : JCU, 53(2), 325-335. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.23850
Generic measures that also apply
- Borg RPE
Borg Rating of Perceived Exertion Scale (6-20)
perceived exertion · 1 items · 1 min
- GROC
Global Rating of Change Scale
perceived change since baseline · 1 items · 1 min
- NPRS
Numeric Pain Rating Scale
pain intensity · 1 items · 1 min
- PGIC
Patient Global Impression of Change
perceived change since baseline · 1 items · 1 min
- PSFS
Patient-Specific Functional Scale
patient-generated function · 3 items · 2 min
- SANE
Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation
patient-rated function as a percentage of normal · 1 items · 1 min
- VAS
Visual Analogue Scale
pain intensity · 1 items · 1 min
- Borg CR10
Borg Category Ratio 10 Scale
perceived exertion or symptom intensity, ratio scale · 1 items · 1 min
- GAS
Goal Attainment Scaling
individualised goal achievement · 10 min
Did this page do its job?
CliniStudy is in beta. One tap is enough — it decides what gets fixed first.